<?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 938 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334920</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Order-in-Appeal regarding Service Tax liability for a transporter of food grains under Goods Transport Agency Services. The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s decision, considering the transporter as a truck owner exempt from Service Tax. It found that the transporter&#039;s activity of delivering food grains under the P.D.S. scheme did not fall under taxable services, as the invoices issued were not consignment notes. Citing relevant precedents, the Tribunal affirmed the legality of the impugned order, rejecting Revenue&#039;s appeal and disposing of the transporter&#039;s cross objection.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2016 14:29:22 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448863" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 938 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334920</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed Revenue&#039;s appeal against the Order-in-Appeal regarding Service Tax liability for a transporter of food grains under Goods Transport Agency Services. The Tribunal upheld the first appellate authority&#039;s decision, considering the transporter as a truck owner exempt from Service Tax. It found that the transporter&#039;s activity of delivering food grains under the P.D.S. scheme did not fall under taxable services, as the invoices issued were not consignment notes. Citing relevant precedents, the Tribunal affirmed the legality of the impugned order, rejecting Revenue&#039;s appeal and disposing of the transporter&#039;s cross objection.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334920</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>