<?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 (2) TMI 1121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355700</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the appellant was not liable to pay Service Tax again on the amount already taxed by the main advertiser. The decision was based on the principle of avoiding double taxation and the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents regarding the payment of Service Tax by subcontractors.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 17 Feb 2018 06:42:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=509415" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 1121 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355700</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the appellant was not liable to pay Service Tax again on the amount already taxed by the main advertiser. The decision was based on the principle of avoiding double taxation and the interpretation of relevant legal provisions and precedents regarding the payment of Service Tax by subcontractors.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=355700</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>