<?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 (3) TMI 810 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325626</link>
    <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and granted consequential relief. It held that the appellant&#039;s activities did not constitute taxable services under &quot;Business Support Services,&quot; the reimbursements received were not taxable, and the appellant acted as a pure agent. The extended period for demanding Service Tax was not applicable due to the revenue-neutral nature of the transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Mar 2017 16:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=421210" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (3) TMI 810 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325626</link>
      <description>The tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the impugned order, and granted consequential relief. It held that the appellant&#039;s activities did not constitute taxable services under &quot;Business Support Services,&quot; the reimbursements received were not taxable, and the appellant acted as a pure agent. The extended period for demanding Service Tax was not applicable due to the revenue-neutral nature of the transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325626</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>