<?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>2004 (4) TMI 3 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179</link>
    <description>Waiver of pre-deposit for service tax and penalty was granted on a prima facie view that the tax liability, if any, attached to the prime consultant rather than the sub-consultant. The departmental circular relied upon indicated that services must be rendered directly to the client, and that services rendered to the prime consultant do not shift the levy to the sub-consultant. On that basis, the applicant was held to have made out a strong prima facie case against the demand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Apr 2008 18:33:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39643" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (4) TMI 3 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179</link>
      <description>Waiver of pre-deposit for service tax and penalty was granted on a prima facie view that the tax liability, if any, attached to the prime consultant rather than the sub-consultant. The departmental circular relied upon indicated that services must be rendered directly to the client, and that services rendered to the prime consultant do not shift the levy to the sub-consultant. On that basis, the applicant was held to have made out a strong prima facie case against the demand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Apr 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>