<?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 (12) TMI 1000 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336355</link>
    <description>A canteen run by a cooperative society for a manufacturing company&#039;s employees was treated as taxable outdoor catering service because it was operated to discharge the employer&#039;s statutory obligation, with consideration coming from employee payments and employer subsidy. The service remained taxable despite subsidised rates and employee use, and mutuality was held irrelevant to the service arrangement. The plea of bona fide belief was rejected: the activity had been carried on openly and continuously, and the extended period of limitation was upheld. The service tax demands were sustained and the appeals failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Aug 2017 14:45:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452212" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1000 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336355</link>
      <description>A canteen run by a cooperative society for a manufacturing company&#039;s employees was treated as taxable outdoor catering service because it was operated to discharge the employer&#039;s statutory obligation, with consideration coming from employee payments and employer subsidy. The service remained taxable despite subsidised rates and employee use, and mutuality was held irrelevant to the service arrangement. The plea of bona fide belief was rejected: the activity had been carried on openly and continuously, and the extended period of limitation was upheld. The service tax demands were sustained and the appeals failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Nov 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336355</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>