<?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>2005 (2) TMI 333 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54008</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, ruled in favor of the Public Sector Undertaking appellants in a case concerning the recovery of interest on delayed crediting of Service Tax collected from telephone subscribers. The Tribunal held that the delay in transferring amounts between government departments did not make the appellants liable for interest payment. Emphasizing that the appellants followed prescribed procedures and deposited amounts daily, the Tribunal set aside the order requiring interest payment, citing changes in instructions by the Board regarding delays in deposit. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 16 Oct 2010 13:18:18 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=92485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2005 (2) TMI 333 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54008</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, Bangalore, ruled in favor of the Public Sector Undertaking appellants in a case concerning the recovery of interest on delayed crediting of Service Tax collected from telephone subscribers. The Tribunal held that the delay in transferring amounts between government departments did not make the appellants liable for interest payment. Emphasizing that the appellants followed prescribed procedures and deposited amounts daily, the Tribunal set aside the order requiring interest payment, citing changes in instructions by the Board regarding delays in deposit. The appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Feb 2005 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=54008</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>