<?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 (10) TMI 114 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207021</link>
    <description>The Bench, led by Archana Wadhwa, condoned the 36-day delay in filing the appeal due to the concerned person&#039;s leave and allowed the COD application. A total Service Tax of Rs.3,08,218/- was confirmed against the appellants for business auxiliary services and trading of tractors. The appellants, registered for C &amp;amp; F agent services, argued that the confirmed tax included C &amp;amp; F commission. The Bench dispensed with the pre-deposit of the balance tax amount, remanding the matter for verification. The appeal proceeded without pre-deposit, and the decision was pronounced in open court, addressing various issues including the classification of services and the need for reevaluation by the adjudicating authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 25 Nov 2011 09:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180502" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (10) TMI 114 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207021</link>
      <description>The Bench, led by Archana Wadhwa, condoned the 36-day delay in filing the appeal due to the concerned person&#039;s leave and allowed the COD application. A total Service Tax of Rs.3,08,218/- was confirmed against the appellants for business auxiliary services and trading of tractors. The appellants, registered for C &amp;amp; F agent services, argued that the confirmed tax included C &amp;amp; F commission. The Bench dispensed with the pre-deposit of the balance tax amount, remanding the matter for verification. The appeal proceeded without pre-deposit, and the decision was pronounced in open court, addressing various issues including the classification of services and the need for reevaluation by the adjudicating authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 03 Oct 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207021</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>