<?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>2018 (1) TMI 1692 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304313</link>
    <description>Revenue&#039;s appeal challenged an order dropping the service tax demand, but the record before CESTAT was incomplete because the relied-upon documents and show cause notice annexures were not part of the appeal file. As the appellant sought time to obtain the connected materials and indicated the matter involved both facts and legal interpretation, the Tribunal granted a last adjournment and fixed the case for the next hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 19 Sep 2022 20:41:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 1692 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304313</link>
      <description>Revenue&#039;s appeal challenged an order dropping the service tax demand, but the record before CESTAT was incomplete because the relied-upon documents and show cause notice annexures were not part of the appeal file. As the appellant sought time to obtain the connected materials and indicated the matter involved both facts and legal interpretation, the Tribunal granted a last adjournment and fixed the case for the next hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=304313</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>