<?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 (9) TMI 1002 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348245</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the liability of M/s Air India Limited to pay service tax on services received from outside India under the reverse charge mechanism. It found the appellant liable for not paying service tax on services categorized under &quot;Business Auxiliary Services&quot; and &quot;Maintenance or Repair Services,&quot; even though the services were performed outside India. The extended period for issuing a show cause notice was deemed applicable due to the appellant&#039;s negligence in disclosing relevant information. Penalties were imposed as the appellant failed to demonstrate a genuine reason for non-payment of service tax, emphasizing the uniform application of tax laws to both public and private sector entities.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 25 Apr 2018 15:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=489833" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 1002 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348245</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the liability of M/s Air India Limited to pay service tax on services received from outside India under the reverse charge mechanism. It found the appellant liable for not paying service tax on services categorized under &quot;Business Auxiliary Services&quot; and &quot;Maintenance or Repair Services,&quot; even though the services were performed outside India. The extended period for issuing a show cause notice was deemed applicable due to the appellant&#039;s negligence in disclosing relevant information. Penalties were imposed as the appellant failed to demonstrate a genuine reason for non-payment of service tax, emphasizing the uniform application of tax laws to both public and private sector entities.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348245</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>