<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2019 (9) TMI 74 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385306</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order, ruling in favor of the Appellant, who had already paid the disputed service tax amount in April 2008 based on the receipt basis. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering historical tax liability calculation methods and the need for thorough examination of evidence for compliance. It emphasized the necessity for adjudicating authorities to address all relevant issues raised by parties for a fair decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Sep 2019 08:06:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=585804" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (9) TMI 74 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385306</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order, ruling in favor of the Appellant, who had already paid the disputed service tax amount in April 2008 based on the receipt basis. The judgment highlighted the importance of considering historical tax liability calculation methods and the need for thorough examination of evidence for compliance. It emphasized the necessity for adjudicating authorities to address all relevant issues raised by parties for a fair decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=385306</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>