<?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>2004 (8) TMI 710 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181911</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the levy of Service Tax on management costs was unjustified. The services provided did not qualify as &quot;Management Consultancy Service&quot; but rather as &quot;Business Auxiliary Service.&quot; Consequently, the penalties, tax demand, and interest imposed on the appellant were set aside, allowing the appeal with relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 01 Jul 2024 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=425779" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2004 (8) TMI 710 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181911</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, determining that the levy of Service Tax on management costs was unjustified. The services provided did not qualify as &quot;Management Consultancy Service&quot; but rather as &quot;Business Auxiliary Service.&quot; Consequently, the penalties, tax demand, and interest imposed on the appellant were set aside, allowing the appeal with relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Central Excise</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Aug 2004 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=181911</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>