<?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 (8) TMI 29 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=811</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower authorities&#039; orders. The appellants&#039; activities were classified as &quot;Broadcasting Service&quot; and not &quot;Advertising Service.&quot; Penalties and demands for the period before 9-7-2001 were deemed unsustainable. The decision was pronounced on 25-8-2006.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 13 Apr 2008 18:01:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40246" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (8) TMI 29 - CESTAT, MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=811</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the lower authorities&#039; orders. The appellants&#039; activities were classified as &quot;Broadcasting Service&quot; and not &quot;Advertising Service.&quot; Penalties and demands for the period before 9-7-2001 were deemed unsustainable. The decision was pronounced on 25-8-2006.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 Aug 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=811</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>