<?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 (12) TMI 329 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253985</link>
    <description>Service tax relief on harvesting and transportation of sugarcane was examined against Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. and Notification No. 14/2004-S.T.; the service was treated prima facie as transportation and harvesting work for a sugar factory, not a covered transaction relating to sale or procurement of agricultural produce, and not shown to be a service in relation to agriculture. The record also did not establish pure agent status for the appellants in relation to the harvesting or transport contractors. On that basis, complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined and 50% of the adjudged service tax was directed to be deposited, with the balance waived on compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Dec 2014 11:25:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=370545" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 329 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253985</link>
      <description>Service tax relief on harvesting and transportation of sugarcane was examined against Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. and Notification No. 14/2004-S.T.; the service was treated prima facie as transportation and harvesting work for a sugar factory, not a covered transaction relating to sale or procurement of agricultural produce, and not shown to be a service in relation to agriculture. The record also did not establish pure agent status for the appellants in relation to the harvesting or transport contractors. On that basis, complete waiver of pre-deposit was declined and 50% of the adjudged service tax was directed to be deposited, with the balance waived on compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253985</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>