<?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>2018 (12) TMI 1736 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284710</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the demand for tax collection not deposited in the government exchequer under the Finance Act, 1994. However, it set aside the penalties imposed under sections 77 and 78 of the Act, considering the appellant&#039;s role as a government department and the circumstances surrounding the non-deposit of the service tax component.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Dec 2019 11:27:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=596405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1736 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284710</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal upheld the demand for tax collection not deposited in the government exchequer under the Finance Act, 1994. However, it set aside the penalties imposed under sections 77 and 78 of the Act, considering the appellant&#039;s role as a government department and the circumstances surrounding the non-deposit of the service tax component.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=284710</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>