<?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 693 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248789</link>
    <description>The tribunal found that maintenance services provided by the appellants, involving greenery on road dividers and gardens, are exempt under Sections 97 and 98 of the Finance Act. The appellate Commissioner&#039;s failure to consider these sections before ordering pre-deposit led to the dismissal of the appeal. The tribunal set aside the orders, remanding the case for a merit-based hearing without the need for pre-deposit, and disposed of the stay application accordingly.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Jun 2014 09:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=358014" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (6) TMI 693 - CESTAT  MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248789</link>
      <description>The tribunal found that maintenance services provided by the appellants, involving greenery on road dividers and gardens, are exempt under Sections 97 and 98 of the Finance Act. The appellate Commissioner&#039;s failure to consider these sections before ordering pre-deposit led to the dismissal of the appeal. The tribunal set aside the orders, remanding the case for a merit-based hearing without the need for pre-deposit, and disposed of the stay application accordingly.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248789</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>