<?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 1158 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335140</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the liability to pay Service Tax on GTA services rested with the consignors who initially paid the freight charges, following the reverse charge mechanism under Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules 1994. Citing relevant precedents, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order demanding Service Tax from the appellant and allowed the appeal with relief in accordance with the law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 26 Nov 2016 10:32:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=449360" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 1158 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335140</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the liability to pay Service Tax on GTA services rested with the consignors who initially paid the freight charges, following the reverse charge mechanism under Rule 2(1)(d)(v) of the Service Tax Rules 1994. Citing relevant precedents, the Tribunal set aside the Commissioner&#039;s order demanding Service Tax from the appellant and allowed the appeal with relief in accordance with the law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Sep 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=335140</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>