<?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 (10) TMI 66 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217113</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for waiver and stay regarding the demand for service tax and education cess for the period from 1-7-2003 to 8-7-2004. The appellant, a commission agent undertaking repairs of machines, claimed exemption under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. for &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039;. The Tribunal interpreted the &#039;Explanation&#039; to the definition of &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039; under the Finance Act, 1994, and found that the repairs undertaken by the appellant were in relation to the sale of machines, falling within the ambit of &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039;. Consequently, the demand under a different head was deemed unsustainable, leading to a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the adjudged dues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Oct 2012 18:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=190491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (10) TMI 66 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217113</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for waiver and stay regarding the demand for service tax and education cess for the period from 1-7-2003 to 8-7-2004. The appellant, a commission agent undertaking repairs of machines, claimed exemption under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. for &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039;. The Tribunal interpreted the &#039;Explanation&#039; to the definition of &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039; under the Finance Act, 1994, and found that the repairs undertaken by the appellant were in relation to the sale of machines, falling within the ambit of &#039;Business Auxiliary Service&#039;. Consequently, the demand under a different head was deemed unsustainable, leading to a waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery for the adjudged dues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=217113</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>