<?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 159 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32525</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the demand raised beyond the normal limitation period was not valid due to the absence of any misstatement or intent to evade duty. The judgment highlighted the importance of bona fide interpretation of the law and the significance of reflecting credits in statutory records.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71165" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 159 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32525</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, emphasizing that the demand raised beyond the normal limitation period was not valid due to the absence of any misstatement or intent to evade duty. The judgment highlighted the importance of bona fide interpretation of the law and the significance of reflecting credits in statutory records.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32525</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>