<?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>2008 (1) TMI 137 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4235</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant advertising agency, stating that service tax should only be imposed on amounts received from clients for services rendered, not on commissions or discounts from media entities. Penalties were deemed unjustified due to the absence of service tax liability on the disputed amounts. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Dec 2008 19:26:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=43581" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (1) TMI 137 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4235</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant advertising agency, stating that service tax should only be imposed on amounts received from clients for services rendered, not on commissions or discounts from media entities. Penalties were deemed unjustified due to the absence of service tax liability on the disputed amounts. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=4235</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>