<?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>2014 (2) TMI 1129 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244535</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a cooperative society, in a case concerning the liability to pay Service tax for buying and selling coal to Coal India Ltd. The Tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s actions of purchasing and reselling coal did not amount to providing business auxiliary services, as alleged by the Revenue. Citing a precedent from the Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s activities fell under buying and selling goods, not taxable services. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that a significant portion of the demand was time-barred and dispensed with the pre-deposit condition of duty and penalty, staying the recovery during the appeal process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 Apr 2017 12:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=347485" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (2) TMI 1129 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244535</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, a cooperative society, in a case concerning the liability to pay Service tax for buying and selling coal to Coal India Ltd. The Tribunal found that the appellant&#039;s actions of purchasing and reselling coal did not amount to providing business auxiliary services, as alleged by the Revenue. Citing a precedent from the Gujarat High Court, the Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s activities fell under buying and selling goods, not taxable services. Additionally, the Tribunal noted that a significant portion of the demand was time-barred and dispensed with the pre-deposit condition of duty and penalty, staying the recovery during the appeal process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Dec 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244535</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>