<?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>2006 (7) TMI 10 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=623</link>
    <description>Where the factual basis needed to determine service tax liability is not available on the record, the matter should be remitted for fresh adjudication rather than decided on merits. The absence of material facts about the nature of services rendered meant the impugned order could not be properly tested. The original authority was therefore directed to verify the relevant facts, hear the appellant, and pass a fresh order. The dispute was sent back for reconsideration, and the earlier order was not affirmed on merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 16:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40068" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 10 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=623</link>
      <description>Where the factual basis needed to determine service tax liability is not available on the record, the matter should be remitted for fresh adjudication rather than decided on merits. The absence of material facts about the nature of services rendered meant the impugned order could not be properly tested. The original authority was therefore directed to verify the relevant facts, hear the appellant, and pass a fresh order. The dispute was sent back for reconsideration, and the earlier order was not affirmed on merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=623</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>