<?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 (6) TMI 104 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31455</link>
    <description>Credit on service tax paid for mobile phone services was treated as unsupported where the record contained no evidence that the services were used in or in relation to manufacture, so full waiver of pre-deposit was not justified on that issue. The plea of limitation was considered a mixed question of law and fact and was therefore deferred to regular hearing rather than decided at the waiver stage. The applicant was required to deposit the duty amount, and on such deposit, waiver of pre-deposit of penalty was granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 104 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31455</link>
      <description>Credit on service tax paid for mobile phone services was treated as unsupported where the record contained no evidence that the services were used in or in relation to manufacture, so full waiver of pre-deposit was not justified on that issue. The plea of limitation was considered a mixed question of law and fact and was therefore deferred to regular hearing rather than decided at the waiver stage. The applicant was required to deposit the duty amount, and on such deposit, waiver of pre-deposit of penalty was granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>