<?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 1503 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240326</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the stay applications seeking tagging of the appeal and expeditious hearing due to being listed with other applications. The petitioner&#039;s claims for exemption under Notification No.8/2004-ST for agency commission and corporate guarantee commission were accepted, with the Tribunal granting waiver of pre-deposit and staying further proceedings regarding service tax liability. The Tribunal found that overseas agents facilitating agricultural export fell within the scope of commission agents, thus qualifying for exemption. Additionally, the Tribunal determined that the corporate guarantee did not fall under banking services, granting relief to the petitioner based on legal interpretations and factual analysis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 28 Apr 2014 12:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=337684" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2013 (11) TMI 1503 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240326</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the stay applications seeking tagging of the appeal and expeditious hearing due to being listed with other applications. The petitioner&#039;s claims for exemption under Notification No.8/2004-ST for agency commission and corporate guarantee commission were accepted, with the Tribunal granting waiver of pre-deposit and staying further proceedings regarding service tax liability. The Tribunal found that overseas agents facilitating agricultural export fell within the scope of commission agents, thus qualifying for exemption. Additionally, the Tribunal determined that the corporate guarantee did not fall under banking services, granting relief to the petitioner based on legal interpretations and factual analysis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 18 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=240326</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>