<?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 (9) TMI 462 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251436</link>
    <description>The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning Service Tax liability on a business transfer agreement. The tribunal found that once the transferor had discharged the Service Tax liability, it could not be imposed again on the transferee. Emphasizing the prohibition against double taxation on the same service, the tribunal set aside the order demanding the tax from the transferee, concluding that such a demand was unjustified.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 13 Sep 2014 13:08:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=365144" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 462 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251436</link>
      <description>The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case concerning Service Tax liability on a business transfer agreement. The tribunal found that once the transferor had discharged the Service Tax liability, it could not be imposed again on the transferee. Emphasizing the prohibition against double taxation on the same service, the tribunal set aside the order demanding the tax from the transferee, concluding that such a demand was unjustified.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 02 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251436</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>