<?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 (11) TMI 248 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252931</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case involving the classification of services, service tax demands, eligibility for export benefits, and repatriation of export proceeds. The services provided were classified as &#039;Business Support Services&#039; rather than &#039;Maintenance or Repair Services&#039; and &#039;Business Auxiliary Services.&#039; The Tribunal held that service tax did not apply to the services as they qualified as exports. The appellant was deemed eligible for export benefits as the services met the criteria under the Export of Service Rules. The argument that export proceeds were repatriated through dividend declaration was rejected, with the Tribunal setting aside the orders and allowing the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 04 Sep 2015 11:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=368330" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (11) TMI 248 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252931</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant in a case involving the classification of services, service tax demands, eligibility for export benefits, and repatriation of export proceeds. The services provided were classified as &#039;Business Support Services&#039; rather than &#039;Maintenance or Repair Services&#039; and &#039;Business Auxiliary Services.&#039; The Tribunal held that service tax did not apply to the services as they qualified as exports. The appellant was deemed eligible for export benefits as the services met the criteria under the Export of Service Rules. The argument that export proceeds were repatriated through dividend declaration was rejected, with the Tribunal setting aside the orders and allowing the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=252931</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>