<?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>Legal Consultancy Services Misclassified u/s 66A of Finance Act, 1994; Legal Representation Misunderstood.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33528</link>
    <description>Import of services - Section 66A of FA, 1994 - the appellants received mainly legal consultancy service and not management or business consultant service - The finding that the said legal firm did not represent the appellant in any Court or legal proceeding and, hence, the service is not legal consultancy, is fallacious. - AT</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2017 06:52:02 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2017 06:52:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=460202" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Legal Consultancy Services Misclassified u/s 66A of Finance Act, 1994; Legal Representation Misunderstood.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33528</link>
      <description>Import of services - Section 66A of FA, 1994 - the appellants received mainly legal consultancy service and not management or business consultant service - The finding that the said legal firm did not represent the appellant in any Court or legal proceeding and, hence, the service is not legal consultancy, is fallacious. - AT</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 03 Mar 2017 06:52:02 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=33528</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>