<?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 (11) TMI 358 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210417</link>
    <description>The tribunal upheld the classification of services as &#039;Cargo Handling Service&#039; but set aside penalties and the demand for the extended period due to the interpretative nature of the issue and the lack of suppression. The case was remanded for determining the value and quantifying the demand for the normal period, ensuring a fair opportunity for both parties to present evidence.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Oct 2012 11:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=183852" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (11) TMI 358 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210417</link>
      <description>The tribunal upheld the classification of services as &#039;Cargo Handling Service&#039; but set aside penalties and the demand for the extended period due to the interpretative nature of the issue and the lack of suppression. The case was remanded for determining the value and quantifying the demand for the normal period, ensuring a fair opportunity for both parties to present evidence.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210417</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>