<?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>2024 (12) TMI 79 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762499</link>
    <description>The appeal challenging the Order-in-Appeal was disposed of with the demand under works contract service being partially upheld. The appellant&#039;s admission of service tax liability led to a reduction in the demand, with adjustments made for the deposited amount. The adjudicating authority confirmed the inclusion of material value in the computation, as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Interest and penalties were imposed under relevant sections of the Act. The appellant&#039;s request to modify the appeal prayer was deemed not maintainable, and the penalty imposition was upheld, finding no merit in the appellant&#039;s submissions regarding the modification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 03 Dec 2024 08:44:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=780432" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 79 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762499</link>
      <description>The appeal challenging the Order-in-Appeal was disposed of with the demand under works contract service being partially upheld. The appellant&#039;s admission of service tax liability led to a reduction in the demand, with adjustments made for the deposited amount. The adjudicating authority confirmed the inclusion of material value in the computation, as directed by the Commissioner (Appeals). Interest and penalties were imposed under relevant sections of the Act. The appellant&#039;s request to modify the appeal prayer was deemed not maintainable, and the penalty imposition was upheld, finding no merit in the appellant&#039;s submissions regarding the modification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762499</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>