<?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>2023 (10) TMI 880 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444657</link>
    <description>A service tax demand was held not to be barred by limitation because the show cause notice was issued within the normal period of 18 months from the relevant dates, notwithstanding a typographical error in the order&#039;s return-date recording. The objection on limitation was rejected, and the demand with related penalty was maintained. An amount deposited during investigation, which had been proposed for adjustment in the notice, was required to be appropriated against the confirmed demand. The appeal succeeded only to that limited extent, while the substantive confirmation of demand, interest, and remaining penalties was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:08:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=729700" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (10) TMI 880 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444657</link>
      <description>A service tax demand was held not to be barred by limitation because the show cause notice was issued within the normal period of 18 months from the relevant dates, notwithstanding a typographical error in the order&#039;s return-date recording. The objection on limitation was rejected, and the demand with related penalty was maintained. An amount deposited during investigation, which had been proposed for adjustment in the notice, was required to be appropriated against the confirmed demand. The appeal succeeded only to that limited extent, while the substantive confirmation of demand, interest, and remaining penalties was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=444657</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>