<?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>2010 (1) TMI 21 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35231</link>
    <description>Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was held unsustainable because the service tax arose from a newly introduced levy, the assessee had paid the tax and interest voluntarily before or by the stage of notice and adjudication, and the record disclosed no mala fide. On those facts, the Tribunal&#039;s conclusion that reasonable cause existed and that Section 80 protected the assessee was upheld. The tax demand itself remained undisturbed, but the penalty was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2014 10:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73831" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (1) TMI 21 - ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35231</link>
      <description>Penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 was held unsustainable because the service tax arose from a newly introduced levy, the assessee had paid the tax and interest voluntarily before or by the stage of notice and adjudication, and the record disclosed no mala fide. On those facts, the Tribunal&#039;s conclusion that reasonable cause existed and that Section 80 protected the assessee was upheld. The tax demand itself remained undisturbed, but the penalty was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Jan 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>