<?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 276 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268972</link>
    <description>In an appeal concerning alleged failure to maintain separate accounts for taxable and exempted output services, the Tribunal held that the stay request should be assessed on a prima facie basis and that only the Cenvat credit attributable to the disputed non-taxable output service, with proportionate interest, needed to be deposited. It noted that restaurant service and short-term accommodation service were not taxable during the relevant period and that, without a valuation mechanism for such services, the levy position was doubtful. Accordingly, partial pre-deposit was directed and recovery of the remaining adjudicated demand was stayed pending disposal of the appeal, subject to compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Sep 2015 10:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=407730" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 276 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268972</link>
      <description>In an appeal concerning alleged failure to maintain separate accounts for taxable and exempted output services, the Tribunal held that the stay request should be assessed on a prima facie basis and that only the Cenvat credit attributable to the disputed non-taxable output service, with proportionate interest, needed to be deposited. It noted that restaurant service and short-term accommodation service were not taxable during the relevant period and that, without a valuation mechanism for such services, the levy position was doubtful. Accordingly, partial pre-deposit was directed and recovery of the remaining adjudicated demand was stayed pending disposal of the appeal, subject to compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268972</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>