<?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 (10) TMI 724 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207162</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted a waiver and stay on recovery in a case concerning the interpretation of &#039;Business Exhibition Service&#039; under Section 65(105)(zzo) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant&#039;s activity of hiring out facilities for exhibitions was found not to squarely fall within the scope of &#039;Business Exhibition Service&#039; as they primarily provided facilities and did not conduct the exhibitions themselves. The distinction between organizing exhibitions and providing facilities was crucial, leading to the conclusion that the appellant&#039;s role of renting out stalls did not align with the statutory definition, justifying the relief granted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 May 2013 14:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=180642" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 724 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207162</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted a waiver and stay on recovery in a case concerning the interpretation of &#039;Business Exhibition Service&#039; under Section 65(105)(zzo) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant&#039;s activity of hiring out facilities for exhibitions was found not to squarely fall within the scope of &#039;Business Exhibition Service&#039; as they primarily provided facilities and did not conduct the exhibitions themselves. The distinction between organizing exhibitions and providing facilities was crucial, leading to the conclusion that the appellant&#039;s role of renting out stalls did not align with the statutory definition, justifying the relief granted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207162</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>