<?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 (10) TMI 48 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386564</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the demands in both appeals on merits and limitation grounds. The classification of services was determined to be primarily transportation, not cargo handling. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the appellant&#039;s bona fide belief and the lack of intent to evade tax. Consequently, the penalties were also set aside. The appeals were allowed, and the demands were annulled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Oct 2019 06:08:20 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=589505" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 48 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386564</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the demands in both appeals on merits and limitation grounds. The classification of services was determined to be primarily transportation, not cargo handling. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the appellant&#039;s bona fide belief and the lack of intent to evade tax. Consequently, the penalties were also set aside. The appeals were allowed, and the demands were annulled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Sep 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386564</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>