<?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>2008 (1) TMI 271 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30182</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case to the Original Authority for re-quantification and penalty imposition within a specified timeframe. The decision was based on the Commissioner&#039;s failure to examine the case on merits, address the plea of limitation, and correctly categorize the Service Tax liability. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a comprehensive review, including considering the time bar issue, to ensure a fair hearing for the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Mar 2014 18:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68839" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 271 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30182</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal by remanding the case to the Original Authority for re-quantification and penalty imposition within a specified timeframe. The decision was based on the Commissioner&#039;s failure to examine the case on merits, address the plea of limitation, and correctly categorize the Service Tax liability. The Tribunal emphasized the need for a comprehensive review, including considering the time bar issue, to ensure a fair hearing for the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 28 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30182</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>