<?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 (7) TMI 206 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235048</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application seeking modification of a stay order, requiring a pre-deposit of 10% of the service tax demanded, due to differences in facts compared to a previous case. The appellant&#039;s argument for similarity with the prior case was rejected as the Tribunal found distinctions in the nature of services provided. The original stay order was upheld, directing the appellant to comply without modification.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 08 Jul 2013 18:07:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197458" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 206 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235048</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the Miscellaneous Application seeking modification of a stay order, requiring a pre-deposit of 10% of the service tax demanded, due to differences in facts compared to a previous case. The appellant&#039;s argument for similarity with the prior case was rejected as the Tribunal found distinctions in the nature of services provided. The original stay order was upheld, directing the appellant to comply without modification.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Jan 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235048</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>