<?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 543 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245090</link>
    <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding service tax demand under &#039;Management Consultancy Service.&#039; The appellant&#039;s argument that they provided Business Support Service, not falling under the purview of service tax until 1.5.2006, was rejected. The tribunal determined that the services provided aligned with Management Consultancy Service as defined in the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was also dismissed concerning the contention of being under a bona fide belief and the challenge to the sustainability of penalties imposed. The nature of services provided, as per the agreement terms, supported upholding the demand for service tax and penalties.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Mar 2014 12:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=348963" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (3) TMI 543 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245090</link>
      <description>The tribunal dismissed the appeal against the Order-in-Appeal passed by the Commissioner (Appeals) regarding service tax demand under &#039;Management Consultancy Service.&#039; The appellant&#039;s argument that they provided Business Support Service, not falling under the purview of service tax until 1.5.2006, was rejected. The tribunal determined that the services provided aligned with Management Consultancy Service as defined in the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was also dismissed concerning the contention of being under a bona fide belief and the challenge to the sustainability of penalties imposed. The nature of services provided, as per the agreement terms, supported upholding the demand for service tax and penalties.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=245090</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>