<?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 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75769</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondent was not liable to pay tax under the categories of Manpower Recruitment Agency and Cargo Handling services. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the activities of the respondent did not fall under these taxable categories. Specifically, the Tribunal concurred with the finding that the supply of manpower was taxed during a period when it was not legally taxable. Additionally, regarding Cargo Handling services, it was determined that the laborers&#039; activities were limited to loading and unloading within the factory premises, leading to the discharge of the respondent from tax liability in this category.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Nov 2015 12:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (7) TMI 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75769</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal upheld the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) that the respondent was not liable to pay tax under the categories of Manpower Recruitment Agency and Cargo Handling services. The Commissioner (Appeals) found that the activities of the respondent did not fall under these taxable categories. Specifically, the Tribunal concurred with the finding that the supply of manpower was taxed during a period when it was not legally taxable. Additionally, regarding Cargo Handling services, it was determined that the laborers&#039; activities were limited to loading and unloading within the factory premises, leading to the discharge of the respondent from tax liability in this category.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75769</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>