<?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 (10) TMI 27 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2778</link>
    <description>Order booking by a broker on behalf of the assessee was held not to constitute Clearing and Forwarding Agent services for service tax purposes. The activity was limited to procuring and booking orders on commission basis; the broker did not handle goods or perform functions characteristic of a clearing and forwarding agent. Relying on Tribunal decisions, mere order booking was treated as outside the taxable scope of C&amp;F services, so the service tax demand could not be sustained and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 08 May 2010 06:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=42131" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (10) TMI 27 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2778</link>
      <description>Order booking by a broker on behalf of the assessee was held not to constitute Clearing and Forwarding Agent services for service tax purposes. The activity was limited to procuring and booking orders on commission basis; the broker did not handle goods or perform functions characteristic of a clearing and forwarding agent. Relying on Tribunal decisions, mere order booking was treated as outside the taxable scope of C&amp;F services, so the service tax demand could not be sustained and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 26 Oct 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2778</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>