<?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>2017 (8) TMI 267 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346209</link>
    <description>Services rendered in India for and on behalf of a foreign entity, where the effective recipient and consumption are outside India, were treated as export of services. On that settled basis, the Tribunal held that service tax could not be levied under the reverse charge mechanism, and the demand was unsustainable. The earlier decision on identical facts was followed, so the order dropping the tax demand was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Aug 2017 11:22:48 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=484756" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 267 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346209</link>
      <description>Services rendered in India for and on behalf of a foreign entity, where the effective recipient and consumption are outside India, were treated as export of services. On that settled basis, the Tribunal held that service tax could not be levied under the reverse charge mechanism, and the demand was unsustainable. The earlier decision on identical facts was followed, so the order dropping the tax demand was upheld and the Revenue&#039;s challenge failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346209</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>