<?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>2020 (11) TMI 435 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400680</link>
    <description>The tribunal set aside the demand arising from the second show cause notice due to procedural lapses and remanded it for fresh adjudication. The demand for the period beyond normal limitation was also set aside, along with the penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of on these terms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 09 Mar 2023 17:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=627702" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (11) TMI 435 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400680</link>
      <description>The tribunal set aside the demand arising from the second show cause notice due to procedural lapses and remanded it for fresh adjudication. The demand for the period beyond normal limitation was also set aside, along with the penalty under section 78 of Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of on these terms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 23 Jul 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=400680</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>