<?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 (11) TMI 470 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267661</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the services provided by the respondent, involving lifting and storing sugar bags, were not taxable under service tax laws for the period in question. The decision was based on the nature of the agreement between the respondent and the principal factory, which indicated that the work was part of a package deal for the supply of raw material. The Tribunal found that the services fell outside the taxable category, as per the relevant provisions applicable during the period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Nov 2015 09:39:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=404878" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 470 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267661</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, holding that the services provided by the respondent, involving lifting and storing sugar bags, were not taxable under service tax laws for the period in question. The decision was based on the nature of the agreement between the respondent and the principal factory, which indicated that the work was part of a package deal for the supply of raw material. The Tribunal found that the services fell outside the taxable category, as per the relevant provisions applicable during the period.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=267661</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>