<?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 (6) TMI 958 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261033</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with any consequential relief. The judgment highlighted the inapplicability of Rule 5(i) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, following the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Delhi, which rendered the provisions ultra vires of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Jun 2015 11:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=388815" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (6) TMI 958 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261033</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with any consequential relief. The judgment highlighted the inapplicability of Rule 5(i) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, following the precedent set by the Hon&#039;ble High Court of Delhi, which rendered the provisions ultra vires of the Finance Act, 1994.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=261033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>