<?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 (8) TMI 40 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31095</link>
    <description>The Tribunal vacated the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, for default in payment of service tax. The appellant&#039;s payment of the entire tax amount before the show-cause notice, willingness to pay interest, and comparisons with previous cases where relief was granted under Section 80 were key factors in the decision. The Tribunal considered the financial crisis faced by the appellant due to criminal breach of trust by sub-agents and granted relief based on the circumstances and precedents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2014 18:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69748" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 40 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31095</link>
      <description>The Tribunal vacated the penalty imposed under Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994, for default in payment of service tax. The appellant&#039;s payment of the entire tax amount before the show-cause notice, willingness to pay interest, and comparisons with previous cases where relief was granted under Section 80 were key factors in the decision. The Tribunal considered the financial crisis faced by the appellant due to criminal breach of trust by sub-agents and granted relief based on the circumstances and precedents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 12 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31095</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>