<?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>2000 (5) TMI 133 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50231</link>
    <description>Penalty for late filing of initial ST-3 returns by a new service tax registrant under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was moderated on the facts, because the levy was new to the assessee, the returns were its first three filings, and the delay was considered in light of the small tax involved and earlier Tribunal views. The Tribunal therefore did not sustain the per-day penalty mechanically and reduced it from Rs. 9,700 to Rs. 1,000. Relief was granted only to that extent, and the balance of the challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2010 14:18:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=88711" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2000 (5) TMI 133 - CEGAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50231</link>
      <description>Penalty for late filing of initial ST-3 returns by a new service tax registrant under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994 was moderated on the facts, because the levy was new to the assessee, the returns were its first three filings, and the delay was considered in light of the small tax involved and earlier Tribunal views. The Tribunal therefore did not sustain the per-day penalty mechanically and reduced it from Rs. 9,700 to Rs. 1,000. Relief was granted only to that extent, and the balance of the challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 May 2000 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=50231</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>