<?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>2005 (6) TMI 569 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) AT NASHIK</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288109</link>
    <description>The appellate authority allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax on godown rent and freight charges, as well as the penalties imposed under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The order was modified to appropriate the appellant&#039;s payment towards certain charges under the proper head, but the remaining confirmed amount and penalties were deemed unsustainable in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 May 2020 16:17:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=613329" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (6) TMI 569 - COMMISSIONER OF CUSTOMS AND CENTRAL EXCISE (APPEALS) AT NASHIK</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288109</link>
      <description>The appellate authority allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax on godown rent and freight charges, as well as the penalties imposed under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The order was modified to appropriate the appellant&#039;s payment towards certain charges under the proper head, but the remaining confirmed amount and penalties were deemed unsustainable in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jun 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=288109</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>