<?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 (3) TMI 116 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356413</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that commitment charges, considered akin to interest, were not subject to service tax. The decision was based on an analysis of agreements, accounting treatment, circulars, and legal interpretations. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside the demand for service tax on commitment charges.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Jun 2019 13:08:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=511278" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 116 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356413</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that commitment charges, considered akin to interest, were not subject to service tax. The decision was based on an analysis of agreements, accounting treatment, circulars, and legal interpretations. The appeal by the Revenue was dismissed, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) decision to set aside the demand for service tax on commitment charges.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356413</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>