<?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>2018 (1) TMI 376 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353640</link>
    <description>Club or association service tax was not payable on facilities provided by the association to its members, as the mutuality principle and the cited precedents showed that the required service-provider and service-recipient relationship was absent. Repair and maintenance of aircraft engines remained taxable even though the work was carried out partly in India and partly in France, because the activity was treated as one composite service received in India under the import-of-service framework. The assessee&#039;s registration, tax compliance on another category, and potential credit entitlement meant suppression or mala fide intent was not established, so the extended period and penalties were not sustainable. The demand was confined to the normal period.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jan 2018 08:16:25 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=503652" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 376 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353640</link>
      <description>Club or association service tax was not payable on facilities provided by the association to its members, as the mutuality principle and the cited precedents showed that the required service-provider and service-recipient relationship was absent. Repair and maintenance of aircraft engines remained taxable even though the work was carried out partly in India and partly in France, because the activity was treated as one composite service received in India under the import-of-service framework. The assessee&#039;s registration, tax compliance on another category, and potential credit entitlement meant suppression or mala fide intent was not established, so the extended period and penalties were not sustainable. The demand was confined to the normal period.</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=353640</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>