<?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>2009 (1) TMI 177 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33867</link>
    <description>Where service tax and interest had already been paid and the challenge to the demand and penalties had not been properly examined, insisting on pre-deposit of the penalty amounts was unwarranted. The pre-deposit direction was set aside, and the appeal was to be heard on merits without requiring any further deposit. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for disposal in accordance with law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 10:10:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72495" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (1) TMI 177 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33867</link>
      <description>Where service tax and interest had already been paid and the challenge to the demand and penalties had not been properly examined, insisting on pre-deposit of the penalty amounts was unwarranted. The pre-deposit direction was set aside, and the appeal was to be heard on merits without requiring any further deposit. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner (Appeals) for disposal in accordance with law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33867</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>