<?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 (8) TMI 785 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236493</link>
    <description>Training described as visual effects, visual communication and animation raised a dispute over whether it qualified as exempt vocational training or fell within the exclusion for computer training institutes under Notification No. 24/2004-ST. The matter required deeper factual and legal examination because the distinction between software skill training and training in software structure was not clear on the interim record. At the stay stage, only limited interim protection was considered appropriate, and complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined. A partial pre-deposit was directed, with balance recovery stayed pending final adjudication of the exemption and classification issues.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2014 12:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=198900" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (8) TMI 785 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236493</link>
      <description>Training described as visual effects, visual communication and animation raised a dispute over whether it qualified as exempt vocational training or fell within the exclusion for computer training institutes under Notification No. 24/2004-ST. The matter required deeper factual and legal examination because the distinction between software skill training and training in software structure was not clear on the interim record. At the stay stage, only limited interim protection was considered appropriate, and complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined. A partial pre-deposit was directed, with balance recovery stayed pending final adjudication of the exemption and classification issues.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=236493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>