<?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>2007 (12) TMI 197 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31433</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld penalties under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, while setting aside the penalty under Section 78. The appellant&#039;s timely tax deposit before notices were served was considered, but penalties were maintained for failure to file returns and pay tax within the required timeframe. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts to evade tax, leading to the setting aside of the penalty under Section 78.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70080" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (12) TMI 197 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31433</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld penalties under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994, while setting aside the penalty under Section 78. The appellant&#039;s timely tax deposit before notices were served was considered, but penalties were maintained for failure to file returns and pay tax within the required timeframe. The Tribunal found no suppression of facts to evade tax, leading to the setting aside of the penalty under Section 78.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Dec 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31433</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>