<?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 (7) TMI 443 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75560</link>
    <description>Pre-deposit for service tax on services performed before 18-04-2006 was not required where the demand related to services received abroad, because the tax liability was stated to commence only from that date. The text applies the settled principle that service tax is a destination-based consumption tax and distinguishes between property-based and performance-based services. As the services were performed before the relevant date, tax was not treated as payable merely because consideration was received later, and the amount attributable to the taxable period had already been deposited. No further pre-deposit was directed during pendency of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=113824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 443 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75560</link>
      <description>Pre-deposit for service tax on services performed before 18-04-2006 was not required where the demand related to services received abroad, because the tax liability was stated to commence only from that date. The text applies the settled principle that service tax is a destination-based consumption tax and distinguishes between property-based and performance-based services. As the services were performed before the relevant date, tax was not treated as payable merely because consideration was received later, and the amount attributable to the taxable period had already been deposited. No further pre-deposit was directed during pendency of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75560</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>