<?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 1039 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254696</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant (CISF) in a case concerning a demand of Service Tax amounting to approximately &amp;amp;8377; 5.99 crores. The demand was challenged by the appellant, who argued that it could be classified under reimbursible expenses, excess pension amount, and Tax on House Rent Allowance (HRA). The Tribunal found that the expenses claimed were not actually incurred by the appellant, leading to a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay against the recovery of the dues during the appeal process.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 29 Dec 2014 08:26:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=372311" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (12) TMI 1039 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254696</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant (CISF) in a case concerning a demand of Service Tax amounting to approximately &amp;amp;8377; 5.99 crores. The demand was challenged by the appellant, who argued that it could be classified under reimbursible expenses, excess pension amount, and Tax on House Rent Allowance (HRA). The Tribunal found that the expenses claimed were not actually incurred by the appellant, leading to a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay against the recovery of the dues during the appeal process.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Jul 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254696</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>