<?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>2016 (2) TMI 335 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271630</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the orders confirming service tax demand and penalties, remanding the case for reevaluation by the adjudicating authority. The authority was directed to differentiate commissions from direct retail sales and those from distributor sales, assess exemption eligibility under Notification No. 6/2005-ST, and consider the limitation period for tax demand. The appellants were instructed to provide necessary documents, and a fair opportunity for defense was mandated.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2016 00:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=416114" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 335 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271630</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the orders confirming service tax demand and penalties, remanding the case for reevaluation by the adjudicating authority. The authority was directed to differentiate commissions from direct retail sales and those from distributor sales, assess exemption eligibility under Notification No. 6/2005-ST, and consider the limitation period for tax demand. The appellants were instructed to provide necessary documents, and a fair opportunity for defense was mandated.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 16 Dec 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=271630</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>