<?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 (12) TMI 605 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352336</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax and interest but modified the penalties imposed, setting aside the penalty under Section 76. The decision emphasized the importance of authorization for service stations and resolved discrepancies in agreement details to determine the tax liability on labour charges for services rendered in different branches.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 13 Dec 2017 08:26:35 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=499518" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 605 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352336</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax and interest but modified the penalties imposed, setting aside the penalty under Section 76. The decision emphasized the importance of authorization for service stations and resolved discrepancies in agreement details to determine the tax liability on labour charges for services rendered in different branches.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352336</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>