<?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 (11) TMI 345 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239168</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting a waiver from pre-deposit of dues and staying the recovery during the appeal period. The tribunal determined that the transaction between the Indian entity and the Italian holding-company did not involve the supply of labor services subject to service tax. It was established that the personnel seconded by the holding-company were considered employees of the Indian company during the deputation period, as outlined in the inter-company secondment agreement. The method of salary disbursement and control over the assignees supported the conclusion that the deputation did not constitute the supply of labor services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Jan 2014 18:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=334782" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 345 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239168</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, granting a waiver from pre-deposit of dues and staying the recovery during the appeal period. The tribunal determined that the transaction between the Indian entity and the Italian holding-company did not involve the supply of labor services subject to service tax. It was established that the personnel seconded by the holding-company were considered employees of the Indian company during the deputation period, as outlined in the inter-company secondment agreement. The method of salary disbursement and control over the assignees supported the conclusion that the deputation did not constitute the supply of labor services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=239168</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>