<?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>2026 (5) TMI 10 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790808</link>
    <description>Exemption from service tax on import of technology was examined against the notification conditions governing payment of Research and Development Cess and supporting documentation. The operative requirement was that the cess be paid on or before payment for the service, together with proper records evidencing compliance. On the facts discussed, the assessee&#039;s charts, returns and supporting documents were treated as sufficient to show compliance with the exemption conditions, and the related demand, interest and penalty were said not to survive. The discussion also notes that the extended period of limitation was considered in light of the notification language and the record of departmental awareness.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:14:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899390" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 10 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790808</link>
      <description>Exemption from service tax on import of technology was examined against the notification conditions governing payment of Research and Development Cess and supporting documentation. The operative requirement was that the cess be paid on or before payment for the service, together with proper records evidencing compliance. On the facts discussed, the assessee&#039;s charts, returns and supporting documents were treated as sufficient to show compliance with the exemption conditions, and the related demand, interest and penalty were said not to survive. The discussion also notes that the extended period of limitation was considered in light of the notification language and the record of departmental awareness.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 30 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790808</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>