<?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 273 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268969</link>
    <description>Commission received for transporting sugarcane from farmers&#039; fields to a sugar factory was treated as falling within the exemption available to commission agents dealing with agricultural products under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. The Tribunal applied an earlier identical factual decision and found no material distinction on the present facts. On that basis, the activity was not subjected to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service, and the demand was not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 09 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 05 Dec 2015 11:04:55 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407727" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 273 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268969</link>
      <description>Commission received for transporting sugarcane from farmers&#039; fields to a sugar factory was treated as falling within the exemption available to commission agents dealing with agricultural products under Notification No. 13/2003-S.T. The Tribunal applied an earlier identical factual decision and found no material distinction on the present facts. On that basis, the activity was not subjected to service tax under Business Auxiliary Service, and the demand was not sustained.</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=268969</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>