<?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 (7) TMI 631 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210299</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order requiring the recipient of services from a foreign service provider to pay service tax prior to 18.04.06. Citing precedent from the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, it was held that the service recipient is not liable for service tax before the specified date for services received from a foreign service provider. The appellant&#039;s receipt of services before 18th April 2006 aligned with this legal position, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Nov 2012 16:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183734" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (7) TMI 631 - CESTAT, DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210299</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the order requiring the recipient of services from a foreign service provider to pay service tax prior to 18.04.06. Citing precedent from the Bombay High Court and the Supreme Court, it was held that the service recipient is not liable for service tax before the specified date for services received from a foreign service provider. The appellant&#039;s receipt of services before 18th April 2006 aligned with this legal position, leading to the appeal being allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210299</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>