<?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 557 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248653</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax under the reverse charge mechanism as the vessels were not located in India during the period in question. The Tribunal referred to the definition of &quot;India&quot; and previous case law to support this conclusion. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the orders and allowed the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=357756" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 557 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248653</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax under the reverse charge mechanism as the vessels were not located in India during the period in question. The Tribunal referred to the definition of &quot;India&quot; and previous case law to support this conclusion. As a result, the Tribunal set aside the orders and allowed the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 May 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248653</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>