<?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>2013 (1) TMI 602 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220498</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for waiver and stay concerning adjudged dues, including service tax and education cess, for the period from October 2008 to September 2009 under the Head &quot;Management, Maintenance or Repair Service.&quot; The Tribunal found a prima facie case in favor of the appellant, acknowledging that the appellant operated and maintained the power plant owned by their subsidiary on a principal-to-principal basis. Based on the analysis of relevant judgments and the terms of the agreement, the Tribunal held that the appellant had a case against the impugned demand, leading to the grant of waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Nov 2013 16:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=193862" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (1) TMI 602 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220498</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the appellant&#039;s request for waiver and stay concerning adjudged dues, including service tax and education cess, for the period from October 2008 to September 2009 under the Head &quot;Management, Maintenance or Repair Service.&quot; The Tribunal found a prima facie case in favor of the appellant, acknowledging that the appellant operated and maintained the power plant owned by their subsidiary on a principal-to-principal basis. Based on the analysis of relevant judgments and the terms of the agreement, the Tribunal held that the appellant had a case against the impugned demand, leading to the grant of waiver of predeposit and stay of recovery.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Aug 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=220498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>