<?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 (11) TMI 274 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31756</link>
    <description>Penalty for delayed payment of service tax under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was set aside because the assessee was new to the business and had paid the tax and interest after departmental visit. The earlier and appellate authorities had sustained a reduced penalty on the basis of delay, but the facts showed that the circumstances did not justify a penal levy. The appeal was allowed and the penalty was cancelled.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Jun 2009 15:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (11) TMI 274 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31756</link>
      <description>Penalty for delayed payment of service tax under Sections 76 and 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was set aside because the assessee was new to the business and had paid the tax and interest after departmental visit. The earlier and appellate authorities had sustained a reduced penalty on the basis of delay, but the facts showed that the circumstances did not justify a penal levy. The appeal was allowed and the penalty was cancelled.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Nov 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31756</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>