<?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 (4) TMI 106 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34138</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs. 10 crores imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to deliberate tax evasion. The service tax liability was confirmed, but recalculations were ordered. The tribunal dismissed the application of Section 80 for penalty reduction, emphasizing the lack of reasonable cause for the failure to pay taxes. The respondent&#039;s cross-objections were disposed of accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 02 Nov 2009 16:34:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72765" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 106 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34138</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the penalty of Rs. 10 crores imposed under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994, due to deliberate tax evasion. The service tax liability was confirmed, but recalculations were ordered. The tribunal dismissed the application of Section 80 for penalty reduction, emphasizing the lack of reasonable cause for the failure to pay taxes. The respondent&#039;s cross-objections were disposed of accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34138</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>