<?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 878 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251852</link>
    <description>Service tax exemption for services received in convertible foreign exchange was not lost merely because dividend was later remitted to a foreign equity holder. The Tribunal held that the notification condition concerning non-repatriation of export proceeds could not be stretched to treat dividend distribution as repatriation of the specific amounts received for taxable services. Because the appellant&#039;s profits included multiple income streams and dividend was declared from accumulated profits after overall accounting, the dividend payment was not the same as returning export proceeds to the foreign shareholder. The exemption therefore remained available.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2014 08:49:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=366074" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (9) TMI 878 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251852</link>
      <description>Service tax exemption for services received in convertible foreign exchange was not lost merely because dividend was later remitted to a foreign equity holder. The Tribunal held that the notification condition concerning non-repatriation of export proceeds could not be stretched to treat dividend distribution as repatriation of the specific amounts received for taxable services. Because the appellant&#039;s profits included multiple income streams and dividend was declared from accumulated profits after overall accounting, the dividend payment was not the same as returning export proceeds to the foreign shareholder. The exemption therefore remained available.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 May 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=251852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>