<?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 (5) TMI 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78363</link>
    <description>Service tax could not be levied on an advance receipt where the taxable service had not yet been performed, because the record did not show that the advance represented consideration for service already rendered. The demand was raised on the basis of treating the advance as taxable value and applying the prescribed percentage, but the levy was premature since the taxable event arises only upon rendition of the service. Accordingly, the demand was held not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Apr 2013 14:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116487" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 521 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78363</link>
      <description>Service tax could not be levied on an advance receipt where the taxable service had not yet been performed, because the record did not show that the advance represented consideration for service already rendered. The demand was raised on the basis of treating the advance as taxable value and applying the prescribed percentage, but the levy was premature since the taxable event arises only upon rendition of the service. Accordingly, the demand was held not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78363</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>