<?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 (10) TMI 446 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349291</link>
    <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the demand for service tax on cargo handling services and Manpower Recruitment Services was unsustainable due to lack of specific evidence of suppression of facts and acknowledgment of no fraud in non-payment. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of a detailed service tax breakup for each category and concluded that the demand invoking the extended period was unjustified, providing consequential reliefs to the appellants.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 11 Oct 2017 06:10:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=492149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (10) TMI 446 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349291</link>
      <description>The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, holding that the demand for service tax on cargo handling services and Manpower Recruitment Services was unsustainable due to lack of specific evidence of suppression of facts and acknowledgment of no fraud in non-payment. The tribunal emphasized the necessity of a detailed service tax breakup for each category and concluded that the demand invoking the extended period was unjustified, providing consequential reliefs to the appellants.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349291</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>