<?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 51 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31293</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants were liable to pay service tax on architectural consultancy services received from M/s Callison, USA, from 01/1/2005 onwards. The extended period of limitation was invoked due to willful suppression of information, justifying penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The matter was remanded for quantification of the service tax demand and reassessment of the penalty under Section 78, with the appeal disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Dec 2008 12:32:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69942" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 51 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31293</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants were liable to pay service tax on architectural consultancy services received from M/s Callison, USA, from 01/1/2005 onwards. The extended period of limitation was invoked due to willful suppression of information, justifying penalties under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The matter was remanded for quantification of the service tax demand and reassessment of the penalty under Section 78, with the appeal disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31293</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>