<?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 (3) TMI 379 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221613</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the modification application, directing the appellant to comply with the original stay order requiring a pre-deposit under the Finance Act and Central Excise Act for toll collection rights contract with NHAI, classified as business auxiliary service. The Tribunal emphasized that NHAI&#039;s toll collection activity was not a statutory function and highlighted the need for significant changes to justify modifications to stay orders.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 20 Mar 2013 16:05:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=194966" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (3) TMI 379 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221613</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the modification application, directing the appellant to comply with the original stay order requiring a pre-deposit under the Finance Act and Central Excise Act for toll collection rights contract with NHAI, classified as business auxiliary service. The Tribunal emphasized that NHAI&#039;s toll collection activity was not a statutory function and highlighted the need for significant changes to justify modifications to stay orders.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221613</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>