<?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 1494 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270190</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the service tax liability for the period after 16/06/2005, amounting to Rs. 5,084 along with interest. However, the appellant was relieved of liability for the earlier period as the work performed did not fall under the category of &#039;maintenance or repair service&#039; for goods or equipment. No penalty was imposed on the confirmed service tax amount due to the nature of the appellant&#039;s activities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 Dec 2015 12:33:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=411283" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (12) TMI 1494 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270190</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the service tax liability for the period after 16/06/2005, amounting to Rs. 5,084 along with interest. However, the appellant was relieved of liability for the earlier period as the work performed did not fall under the category of &#039;maintenance or repair service&#039; for goods or equipment. No penalty was imposed on the confirmed service tax amount due to the nature of the appellant&#039;s activities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Jul 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=270190</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>