<?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 (9) TMI 310 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202025</link>
    <description>Demurrage charges for storage and warehousing of agricultural produce were held outside the taxable service category because the statutory definition of storage and warehousing expressly excludes storage of agricultural produce, a position reinforced by the Board&#039;s clarificatory circular. The exemption therefore continued to apply to such charges. The appellate authority was also found to have no power to remand after the amendment withdrawing that power under Section 35A, and it was required to decide the dispute on merits instead of sending it back for fresh adjudication. The remand order was consequently set aside, with the agricultural produce exemption left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Jul 2014 17:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=175615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (9) TMI 310 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202025</link>
      <description>Demurrage charges for storage and warehousing of agricultural produce were held outside the taxable service category because the statutory definition of storage and warehousing expressly excludes storage of agricultural produce, a position reinforced by the Board&#039;s clarificatory circular. The exemption therefore continued to apply to such charges. The appellate authority was also found to have no power to remand after the amendment withdrawing that power under Section 35A, and it was required to decide the dispute on merits instead of sending it back for fresh adjudication. The remand order was consequently set aside, with the agricultural produce exemption left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202025</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>