<?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 325 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30937</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for a full waiver of the service tax and penalties demanded until the appeal&#039;s final disposal. It was determined that the recipient was not liable to pay service tax for the period in question based on the interpretation that the amendment in rule 2(1)(d)(iv) did not create a new liability. The Tribunal combined the appeal with another Service Tax Appeal for a joint final hearing, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s entitlement to the waiver of the tax demanded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Apr 2009 07:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69590" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 325 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30937</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for a full waiver of the service tax and penalties demanded until the appeal&#039;s final disposal. It was determined that the recipient was not liable to pay service tax for the period in question based on the interpretation that the amendment in rule 2(1)(d)(iv) did not create a new liability. The Tribunal combined the appeal with another Service Tax Appeal for a joint final hearing, emphasizing the appellant&#039;s entitlement to the waiver of the tax demanded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30937</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>