<?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 (12) TMI 156 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268852</link>
    <description>Free-of-cost goods supplied by the service recipient are not includible in the value used to deny exemption under the relevant service tax notifications. The service tax demand, along with interest and penalty, depended entirely on treating such supplies as part of the taxable value for exemption purposes, but that approach was already covered by a Larger Bench ruling against inclusion. On that basis, the demand could not be sustained and the assessee succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2016 12:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407384" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 156 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268852</link>
      <description>Free-of-cost goods supplied by the service recipient are not includible in the value used to deny exemption under the relevant service tax notifications. The service tax demand, along with interest and penalty, depended entirely on treating such supplies as part of the taxable value for exemption purposes, but that approach was already covered by a Larger Bench ruling against inclusion. On that basis, the demand could not be sustained and the assessee succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>