<?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>2015 (4) TMI 496 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258614</link>
    <description>At the stay stage, a prima facie case was found for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery against the confirmed service tax demand. Notification No. 18/2009-ST was treated as substantially satisfied, and procedural lapses such as delayed returns and non-intimation did not, on the facts, defeat the substantive exemption claim. The demand on commission paid to overseas agents was also viewed as prima facie offset by available credit. Objections relating to Business Exhibition Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service were accepted because the exhibitions were held abroad and no inspection or certification activity was shown. For GTA service, the burden remained on Revenue, and the record did not displace the claim that transport was by individual truck owners without consignment notes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 12 Sep 2015 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=381859" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (4) TMI 496 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258614</link>
      <description>At the stay stage, a prima facie case was found for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery against the confirmed service tax demand. Notification No. 18/2009-ST was treated as substantially satisfied, and procedural lapses such as delayed returns and non-intimation did not, on the facts, defeat the substantive exemption claim. The demand on commission paid to overseas agents was also viewed as prima facie offset by available credit. Objections relating to Business Exhibition Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service were accepted because the exhibitions were held abroad and no inspection or certification activity was shown. For GTA service, the burden remained on Revenue, and the record did not displace the claim that transport was by individual truck owners without consignment notes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258614</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>