<?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 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334472</link>
    <description>The appeal was disposed of by remand, with directions to the Commissioner for a fresh assessment. The Tribunal held that activities introduced in the service tax net from a specific date cannot be taxed for the prior period under a different entry. It was established that service tax for the period before 01.07.2003 under Consulting Engineer service was not applicable. The case emphasized the need for proper verification of documents regarding the appellant&#039;s claim of service tax payment by their head office.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Dec 2016 11:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=447672" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 490 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334472</link>
      <description>The appeal was disposed of by remand, with directions to the Commissioner for a fresh assessment. The Tribunal held that activities introduced in the service tax net from a specific date cannot be taxed for the prior period under a different entry. It was established that service tax for the period before 01.07.2003 under Consulting Engineer service was not applicable. The case emphasized the need for proper verification of documents regarding the appellant&#039;s claim of service tax payment by their head office.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334472</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>