<?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 52 -  CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1658</link>
    <description>Port service under the Finance Act, 1994 was construed to cover services rendered by a port or its authorised person, not independent ship repair contracts. Applying ejusdem generis, the residuary phrase &quot;any other service in respect of vessels&quot; was read in line with specific port-handling activities and confined to services connected with movement or handling of vessels in port. Ship repair, chipping, cleaning, painting and overhauling in dry docks were therefore treated as outside the port service entry. On limitation, disclosure of activities and a bona fide interpretative dispute meant no suppression or intent to evade, so the extended period could not be invoked.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 01 Mar 2014 15:18:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41055" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 52 -  CESTAT,MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1658</link>
      <description>Port service under the Finance Act, 1994 was construed to cover services rendered by a port or its authorised person, not independent ship repair contracts. Applying ejusdem generis, the residuary phrase &quot;any other service in respect of vessels&quot; was read in line with specific port-handling activities and confined to services connected with movement or handling of vessels in port. Ship repair, chipping, cleaning, painting and overhauling in dry docks were therefore treated as outside the port service entry. On limitation, disclosure of activities and a bona fide interpretative dispute meant no suppression or intent to evade, so the extended period could not be invoked.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1658</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>