<?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 (7) TMI 72 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30781</link>
    <description>Service tax on Goods Transport Operators&#039; Service remained payable under the post-amendment validating and return-filing mechanism introduced through section 71A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tax demand was therefore restored despite earlier appellate relief. Penalties were not enforceable where sufficient cause existed on the facts, even though the underlying tax liability was legally due. The operative position was payment of service tax while retaining relief from penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Feb 2009 20:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69435" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 72 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30781</link>
      <description>Service tax on Goods Transport Operators&#039; Service remained payable under the post-amendment validating and return-filing mechanism introduced through section 71A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tax demand was therefore restored despite earlier appellate relief. Penalties were not enforceable where sufficient cause existed on the facts, even though the underlying tax liability was legally due. The operative position was payment of service tax while retaining relief from penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 21 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30781</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>