<?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 (11) TMI 355 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204900</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, ruled in favor of the appellant, a commission agent procuring fabrics for a garment manufacturer, in a case concerning the denial of exemption from Service Tax under Notification No. 14/04-S.T. The Tribunal held that the appellant, as a commercial concern engaged in fabric sourcing, fell within the criteria for exemption outlined in the Notification. As the appellant was not required to establish providing specific Business Auxiliary Services, the demand for Service Tax, interest, and penalty was deemed unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 21 Dec 2011 12:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=178427" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (11) TMI 355 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204900</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, CHENNAI, ruled in favor of the appellant, a commission agent procuring fabrics for a garment manufacturer, in a case concerning the denial of exemption from Service Tax under Notification No. 14/04-S.T. The Tribunal held that the appellant, as a commercial concern engaged in fabric sourcing, fell within the criteria for exemption outlined in the Notification. As the appellant was not required to establish providing specific Business Auxiliary Services, the demand for Service Tax, interest, and penalty was deemed unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=204900</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>