<?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 (8) TMI 478 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203873</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found in favor of M/s. Aneri Constructions on various issues related to service tax liability. It noted that the Commissioner had not adequately considered aspects such as the contractor-subcontractor relationship and changes in service definitions. The claim for exemption under Notification No. 67/95 for fabrication work was remanded for further review. The Tribunal also directed a reevaluation of abatement claims and treatment of amounts as cum-service tax. Additionally, the appellants&#039; claim of bona fide belief was deemed significant, leading to a remand for a fresh decision to thoroughly assess their belief in light of relevant legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 22 Jun 2011 14:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177423" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (8) TMI 478 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203873</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found in favor of M/s. Aneri Constructions on various issues related to service tax liability. It noted that the Commissioner had not adequately considered aspects such as the contractor-subcontractor relationship and changes in service definitions. The claim for exemption under Notification No. 67/95 for fabrication work was remanded for further review. The Tribunal also directed a reevaluation of abatement claims and treatment of amounts as cum-service tax. Additionally, the appellants&#039; claim of bona fide belief was deemed significant, leading to a remand for a fresh decision to thoroughly assess their belief in light of relevant legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 26 Aug 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203873</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>