<?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 717 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353981</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Original Authority&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeals. It found that the respondent&#039;s operating leases were correctly classified and taxed as operating leases, not subject to service tax under BOFS. The decision was based on a thorough examination of lease agreements, AS-19, and relevant legal precedents, including the Supreme Court&#039;s distinction between financial and operating leases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 10 Jan 2019 16:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=504597" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (1) TMI 717 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353981</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Original Authority&#039;s decision, dismissing the Revenue&#039;s appeals. It found that the respondent&#039;s operating leases were correctly classified and taxed as operating leases, not subject to service tax under BOFS. The decision was based on a thorough examination of lease agreements, AS-19, and relevant legal precedents, including the Supreme Court&#039;s distinction between financial and operating leases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=353981</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>