<?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 (12) TMI 1 - CESTAT (NEW DELHI)</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210</link>
    <description>The Applicants sought waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalty under the Finance Act, 1994, totaling Rs. 1,27,72,825/- and Rs. 2,55,50,010/-, respectively. The dispute revolved around the interpretation of taxable service for PCO subscribers. The Applicants argued for taxation based on the gross total amount received, citing a Board&#039;s Circular. The Revenue contended that PCO subscribers were liable for service tax on total amounts collected. Considering the Circular, the Applicants&#039; position was favored, leading to the waiver of duty and penalty. The Revenue&#039;s improper recovery during the stay application was noted, entitling the Applicants to interest. The matter was adjourned for further proceedings.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 01 Jul 2008 14:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=39674" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (12) TMI 1 - CESTAT (NEW DELHI)</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210</link>
      <description>The Applicants sought waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalty under the Finance Act, 1994, totaling Rs. 1,27,72,825/- and Rs. 2,55,50,010/-, respectively. The dispute revolved around the interpretation of taxable service for PCO subscribers. The Applicants argued for taxation based on the gross total amount received, citing a Board&#039;s Circular. The Revenue contended that PCO subscribers were liable for service tax on total amounts collected. Considering the Circular, the Applicants&#039; position was favored, leading to the waiver of duty and penalty. The Revenue&#039;s improper recovery during the stay application was noted, entitling the Applicants to interest. The matter was adjourned for further proceedings.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 31 Dec 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>