<?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 (2) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205962</link>
    <description>Packaging and bottling of alcoholic liquor, together with related plant operations, was treated as manufacture under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. As a result, the same activity could not be taxed again as business auxiliary services under service tax law, and the contrary earlier view was held no longer good law. The tax demand and consequential levy were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2014 15:22:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=179462" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 465 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205962</link>
      <description>Packaging and bottling of alcoholic liquor, together with related plant operations, was treated as manufacture under section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act, 1944. As a result, the same activity could not be taxed again as business auxiliary services under service tax law, and the contrary earlier view was held no longer good law. The tax demand and consequential levy were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205962</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>