<?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 1713 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467202</link>
    <description>The text addresses multiple service tax issues: denial of CENVAT credit for lack of original documents was remitted for verification and redetermination; export-related service tax demands were remitted for reconsideration after disclosure and verification of range officer reports and foreign exchange receipts; service tax on sponsorship expenses is treated as taxable where amounts are recorded as sponsorship without supporting proof and that demand is sustained in principle; reconciliation discrepancies between ST 3 returns and financial statements support taxable consideration and are upheld subject to redetermination; cum tax pricing requires factual invoice-based determination and was remitted; the proviso extending limitation for suppression is invoked; interest follows confirmed tax; penalties for suppression/mis declaration are imposable but quantum to be redetermined.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 10:11:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=889802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (12) TMI 1713 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467202</link>
      <description>The text addresses multiple service tax issues: denial of CENVAT credit for lack of original documents was remitted for verification and redetermination; export-related service tax demands were remitted for reconsideration after disclosure and verification of range officer reports and foreign exchange receipts; service tax on sponsorship expenses is treated as taxable where amounts are recorded as sponsorship without supporting proof and that demand is sustained in principle; reconciliation discrepancies between ST 3 returns and financial statements support taxable consideration and are upheld subject to redetermination; cum tax pricing requires factual invoice-based determination and was remitted; the proviso extending limitation for suppression is invoked; interest follows confirmed tax; penalties for suppression/mis declaration are imposable but quantum to be redetermined.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=467202</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>