<?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 400 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346342</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, who were registered as Custom House Agents, in a case concerning their liability to pay service tax under the category of Steamer Agent Service for collecting charges from shipping liners. The Tribunal found that the incentive received by the appellants from shipping liners could not be considered as commission subject to service tax. Despite being registered as custom house agents, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants&#039; activity did not fall under the definition of steamer agent service. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 13 Oct 2017 10:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=485123" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 400 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346342</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, who were registered as Custom House Agents, in a case concerning their liability to pay service tax under the category of Steamer Agent Service for collecting charges from shipping liners. The Tribunal found that the incentive received by the appellants from shipping liners could not be considered as commission subject to service tax. Despite being registered as custom house agents, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants&#039; activity did not fall under the definition of steamer agent service. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalty was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346342</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>