<?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>2022 (11) TMI 633 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430209</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the services provided were exempt under Notification No. 45/2010-ST, making the demand unsustainable on merit. The demand was also beyond the limitation period and lacked evidence of suppression or mala fide intent. Consequently, penalties imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed, modifying the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Dec 2022 14:50:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=695779" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (11) TMI 633 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430209</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the services provided were exempt under Notification No. 45/2010-ST, making the demand unsustainable on merit. The demand was also beyond the limitation period and lacked evidence of suppression or mala fide intent. Consequently, penalties imposed were set aside, and the appeal was allowed, modifying the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 11 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=430209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>