<?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 (3) TMI 335 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244880</link>
    <description>The Court held that the services provided by the appellant primarily involved transportation services and temporary storage incidental to transportation, not constituting &#039;Clearing and Forwarding Agent Service&#039;. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the demand for Service Tax under the disputed category and providing consequential relief to the appellant in accordance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Sep 2014 14:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 335 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244880</link>
      <description>The Court held that the services provided by the appellant primarily involved transportation services and temporary storage incidental to transportation, not constituting &#039;Clearing and Forwarding Agent Service&#039;. The appeal was allowed, setting aside the demand for Service Tax under the disputed category and providing consequential relief to the appellant in accordance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 26 Jun 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244880</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>