<?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 135 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2316</link>
    <description>Service tax on intra-company activities was found inapplicable where one part of the assessee company performed work for another part of the same company and no service was rendered to any person outside the company. The Tribunal noted that the Department did not cite any contrary authority to displace the precedent relied on by the assessee. Applying that precedent, it treated the absence of service to an outside person as taking the activity outside the tax demand, and the demand was regarded as not sustainable in law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 22 Sep 2009 10:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41683" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (5) TMI 135 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2316</link>
      <description>Service tax on intra-company activities was found inapplicable where one part of the assessee company performed work for another part of the same company and no service was rendered to any person outside the company. The Tribunal noted that the Department did not cite any contrary authority to displace the precedent relied on by the assessee. Applying that precedent, it treated the absence of service to an outside person as taking the activity outside the tax demand, and the demand was regarded as not sustainable in law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2316</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>