<?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>2009 (6) TMI 386 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75538</link>
    <description>The applicants established a prima facie case for interim relief because the invoices for transport service showed charges below the notification threshold, making the claim for exemption under Notification No. 34/2004-S.T. supportable at the stay stage. On that basis, pre-deposit of service tax and penalty was waived and recovery was stayed pending the appeal. The order is confined to the interim assessment of the exemption claim and does not decide the final merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 06 May 2010 13:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113802" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 386 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75538</link>
      <description>The applicants established a prima facie case for interim relief because the invoices for transport service showed charges below the notification threshold, making the claim for exemption under Notification No. 34/2004-S.T. supportable at the stay stage. On that basis, pre-deposit of service tax and penalty was waived and recovery was stayed pending the appeal. The order is confined to the interim assessment of the exemption claim and does not decide the final merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 16 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75538</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>