<?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 266 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235108</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax under &#039;Franchise Services&#039; and &#039;Management Consultancy Services.&#039; Penalties and interest were deemed unsustainable as there was no suppression of facts. The agreements with Contract Bottling Units were not considered as franchise relationships. Additionally, services received from outside India before 18.04.2006 were not subject to service tax. The judgment was issued on 11/3/2013.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jul 2013 16:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=197518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (7) TMI 266 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235108</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand for service tax under &#039;Franchise Services&#039; and &#039;Management Consultancy Services.&#039; Penalties and interest were deemed unsustainable as there was no suppression of facts. The agreements with Contract Bottling Units were not considered as franchise relationships. Additionally, services received from outside India before 18.04.2006 were not subject to service tax. The judgment was issued on 11/3/2013.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 11 Mar 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=235108</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>