<?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 (9) TMI 75 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31760</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties under Sections 75A, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on a health club and fitness service provider for failing to pay Service tax despite collecting it from customers. The Tribunal rejected the defense of ignorance regarding the registration procedure, emphasizing that the service provider was aware of their tax liability and had the means to clarify any doubts with the department.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Dec 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70406" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 75 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31760</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the imposition of penalties under Sections 75A, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 on a health club and fitness service provider for failing to pay Service tax despite collecting it from customers. The Tribunal rejected the defense of ignorance regarding the registration procedure, emphasizing that the service provider was aware of their tax liability and had the means to clarify any doubts with the department.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31760</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>