<?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>2007 (5) TMI 27 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1544</link>
    <description>Leasing LPG storage tanks and associated equipment on an exclusive licensed basis, with the provider undertaking only pumping from the ship into the tanks, did not amount to storage and warehousing service for service tax purposes. The determinative principle was that mere renting of storage space is insufficient unless the provider also assumes the core incidents of storage operations, such as security, stacking, loading or unloading within the storage area. As unloading at the jetty was treated as port service and the subsequent storage responsibilities remained with the recipient, the activity fell outside the taxable service. The demand, penalties and interest were therefore not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 14 Apr 2008 18:57:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=40951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 27 - CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1544</link>
      <description>Leasing LPG storage tanks and associated equipment on an exclusive licensed basis, with the provider undertaking only pumping from the ship into the tanks, did not amount to storage and warehousing service for service tax purposes. The determinative principle was that mere renting of storage space is insufficient unless the provider also assumes the core incidents of storage operations, such as security, stacking, loading or unloading within the storage area. As unloading at the jetty was treated as port service and the subsequent storage responsibilities remained with the recipient, the activity fell outside the taxable service. The demand, penalties and interest were therefore not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 25 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1544</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>