<?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 (6) TMI 33 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1848</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders in both appeals. It held that the Commissioner of Service Tax cannot review an order if an appeal is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals). Additionally, handling charges and transaction charges were excluded from the taxable value for Service Tax purposes as they were not considered part of brokerage or commission. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2014 18:03:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41231" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (6) TMI 33 - CESTAT,  BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1848</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders in both appeals. It held that the Commissioner of Service Tax cannot review an order if an appeal is pending before the Commissioner (Appeals). Additionally, handling charges and transaction charges were excluded from the taxable value for Service Tax purposes as they were not considered part of brokerage or commission. The appeals were allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Jun 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1848</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>