<?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 (2) TMI 1628 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301940</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order for the demand of Service Tax, setting aside the confirmation of demand and granting consequential relief. The Tribunal affirmed the sanctioning of the balance refund amount by the Commissioner (Appeals) and clarified that the assessee is entitled to the refund only once, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Apr 2022 21:34:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=677330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (2) TMI 1628 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301940</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee against the Commissioner (Appeals)&#039;s order for the demand of Service Tax, setting aside the confirmation of demand and granting consequential relief. The Tribunal affirmed the sanctioning of the balance refund amount by the Commissioner (Appeals) and clarified that the assessee is entitled to the refund only once, rejecting the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 19 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301940</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>