<?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>2012 (7) TMI 256 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214681</link>
    <description>Dealers or agents promoting the appellants&#039; products were alleged to be advertising agents, but at the prima facie stage their activities were found not to fall within the category of advertising agency. On that basis, the appellants established a prima facie case for interim protection pending appeal, justifying waiver of pre-deposit of the service tax, interest and penalties. Recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Nov 2013 13:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 256 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214681</link>
      <description>Dealers or agents promoting the appellants&#039; products were alleged to be advertising agents, but at the prima facie stage their activities were found not to fall within the category of advertising agency. On that basis, the appellants established a prima facie case for interim protection pending appeal, justifying waiver of pre-deposit of the service tax, interest and penalties. Recovery was stayed during the pendency of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214681</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>