<?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 300 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30335</link>
    <description>Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act were held not leviable where service tax and interest had been paid before adjudication and the assessee showed reasonable cause under Section 80. The assessee&#039;s bona fide belief, based on Notification No. 25/2004-ST and its understanding that the activity was job work not subject to tax for the relevant period, meant wilful suppression or intent to evade was not established. On that basis, Section 80 operated to bar penalty and the penalties were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2014 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 300 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30335</link>
      <description>Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act were held not leviable where service tax and interest had been paid before adjudication and the assessee showed reasonable cause under Section 80. The assessee&#039;s bona fide belief, based on Notification No. 25/2004-ST and its understanding that the activity was job work not subject to tax for the relevant period, meant wilful suppression or intent to evade was not established. On that basis, Section 80 operated to bar penalty and the penalties were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30335</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>