<?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 (4) TMI 81 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1857</link>
    <description>Where the dominant arrangement is commission-based sale facilitation, incidental receipt, storage and despatch clauses do not by themselves create a clearing and forwarding agency for service-tax purposes. The text states that a commission agent selling the principal&#039;s goods on commission falls within Business Auxiliary Services, and that the relevant exemption for commission agents applied on the facts found. It also notes that the earlier Revenue-cited decision was distinguishable because it involved clearance of goods from the factory onwards. On that basis, the respondent was not taxable as a clearing and forwarding agent and the demand was dropped.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Mar 2014 16:04:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41240" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (4) TMI 81 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1857</link>
      <description>Where the dominant arrangement is commission-based sale facilitation, incidental receipt, storage and despatch clauses do not by themselves create a clearing and forwarding agency for service-tax purposes. The text states that a commission agent selling the principal&#039;s goods on commission falls within Business Auxiliary Services, and that the relevant exemption for commission agents applied on the facts found. It also notes that the earlier Revenue-cited decision was distinguishable because it involved clearance of goods from the factory onwards. On that basis, the respondent was not taxable as a clearing and forwarding agent and the demand was dropped.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 24 Apr 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1857</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>