<?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 (9) TMI 298 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75917</link>
    <description>Service tax credit on canteen services was treated as admissible because a Larger Bench had already settled the issue in favour of assessees, and that view was followed to uphold the lower appellate authority. The separate grievance relating to garden maintenance was not examined on merits in the revenue appeal because no finding had been recorded below, so the issue did not survive for decision. The appeals were rejected.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 25 May 2010 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=114153" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (9) TMI 298 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75917</link>
      <description>Service tax credit on canteen services was treated as admissible because a Larger Bench had already settled the issue in favour of assessees, and that view was followed to uphold the lower appellate authority. The separate grievance relating to garden maintenance was not examined on merits in the revenue appeal because no finding had been recorded below, so the issue did not survive for decision. The appeals were rejected.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Sep 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>