<?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 (6) TMI 82 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35141</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the tax liability but waived the penalty imposed on the appellant under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s cooperation and lack of deliberate avoidance of registration. The Tribunal emphasized that this decision should not be considered a precedent due to the unique circumstances of the case. The application for an extension of stay was deemed unnecessary following the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 17:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73745" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 82 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35141</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the tax liability but waived the penalty imposed on the appellant under Sections 76 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The decision was based on the appellant&#039;s cooperation and lack of deliberate avoidance of registration. The Tribunal emphasized that this decision should not be considered a precedent due to the unique circumstances of the case. The application for an extension of stay was deemed unnecessary following the Tribunal&#039;s order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35141</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>