<?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 1197 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352928</link>
    <description>The appeal was dismissed except for granting cum duty benefit. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to calculate the cum duty benefit and adjust penalties accordingly. The decision highlighted the significance of representational rights and specific agreement terms in determining franchise service tax applicability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Apr 2018 13:02:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=501090" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1197 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352928</link>
      <description>The appeal was dismissed except for granting cum duty benefit. The matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to calculate the cum duty benefit and adjust penalties accordingly. The decision highlighted the significance of representational rights and specific agreement terms in determining franchise service tax applicability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=352928</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>