<?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>2010 (4) TMI 497 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78431</link>
    <description>Service tax quantification depended on verification of freight documents and freight accounts, because the dispute concerned correct computation rather than the existence of the levy. The records had to be examined to determine whether the conditions and thresholds in the relevant exemption notifications were satisfied. If those requirements were met, the appellant would be entitled to the exemption benefit. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after verification of the records and grant of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 11:20:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=116554" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (4) TMI 497 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78431</link>
      <description>Service tax quantification depended on verification of freight documents and freight accounts, because the dispute concerned correct computation rather than the existence of the levy. The records had to be examined to determine whether the conditions and thresholds in the relevant exemption notifications were satisfied. If those requirements were met, the appellant would be entitled to the exemption benefit. The matter was therefore remanded for fresh adjudication after verification of the records and grant of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 12 Apr 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=78431</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>