<?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>2011 (1) TMI 90 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202702</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for Service Tax and penalties imposed. The judgment held that the services provided by the appellant, involving the transfer of technical know-how, were not subject to service tax as they were rendered outside India and consumed within India. The Tribunal agreed that the services provided from the USA were beyond the jurisdiction of the Indian Service Tax authority, emphasizing that the taxable event must occur in India for service tax liability. Additionally, the demand was deemed barred by limitation for the period 2000-2001 due to lack of evidence of intentional suppression of taxable facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 Apr 2011 01:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=176277" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (1) TMI 90 - CESTAT,  AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202702</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for Service Tax and penalties imposed. The judgment held that the services provided by the appellant, involving the transfer of technical know-how, were not subject to service tax as they were rendered outside India and consumed within India. The Tribunal agreed that the services provided from the USA were beyond the jurisdiction of the Indian Service Tax authority, emphasizing that the taxable event must occur in India for service tax liability. Additionally, the demand was deemed barred by limitation for the period 2000-2001 due to lack of evidence of intentional suppression of taxable facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Sat, 08 Jan 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=202702</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>