<?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 725 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272020</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi granted a stay of the order-in-appeal with a waiver of pre-deposit for franchisee distributors appealing against tax liabilities on services related to SIM cards and other products. The Tribunal found the distinction in tax treatment between SIM cards and other products to be illogical and lacking commercial basis. It emphasized that tax liability should be based on the gross value charged from customers, including the commission paid to distributors. The impugned orders were set aside, and both appeals were allowed, stressing the importance of consistency in tax treatment and considering the full value of services provided to customers.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 04 Oct 2016 16:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=417444" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (2) TMI 725 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272020</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi granted a stay of the order-in-appeal with a waiver of pre-deposit for franchisee distributors appealing against tax liabilities on services related to SIM cards and other products. The Tribunal found the distinction in tax treatment between SIM cards and other products to be illogical and lacking commercial basis. It emphasized that tax liability should be based on the gross value charged from customers, including the commission paid to distributors. The impugned orders were set aside, and both appeals were allowed, stressing the importance of consistency in tax treatment and considering the full value of services provided to customers.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Oct 2015 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=272020</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>