<?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 (4) TMI 45 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221849</link>
    <description>The court held that the respondent did not act as a Clearing and Forwarding Agent under the agreement with BALCO. The respondent&#039;s activities were found to be more aligned with independent selling of goods rather than typical C &amp;amp; F Agent tasks. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal was upheld, ruling in favor of the respondent and rejecting the tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 14 Aug 2014 15:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=195201" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (4) TMI 45 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221849</link>
      <description>The court held that the respondent did not act as a Clearing and Forwarding Agent under the agreement with BALCO. The respondent&#039;s activities were found to be more aligned with independent selling of goods rather than typical C &amp;amp; F Agent tasks. The Tribunal&#039;s decision to dismiss the Revenue&#039;s appeal was upheld, ruling in favor of the respondent and rejecting the tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 14 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=221849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>