<?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 (6) TMI 348 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248444</link>
    <description>The Tribunal found that the appellants were not liable to pay service tax under the taxable service of storage and warehousing for leasing out Petroleum Products Outlets to dealers. It was determined that the dealers had control over the operations at the outlets, and the appellants were solely leasing facilities to them. As the service provided did not meet the criteria for storage and warehousing services by the appellants, the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 16 Sep 2014 11:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 348 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248444</link>
      <description>The Tribunal found that the appellants were not liable to pay service tax under the taxable service of storage and warehousing for leasing out Petroleum Products Outlets to dealers. It was determined that the dealers had control over the operations at the outlets, and the appellants were solely leasing facilities to them. As the service provided did not meet the criteria for storage and warehousing services by the appellants, the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Mar 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>