<?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 (6) TMI 1007 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362180</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the demand for the period prior to 1st March 2006 and sustained the demand for the period thereafter, with the corresponding penalty. The exclusion of interest income from taxable value was upheld, but processing/management fees were deemed taxable. The judgment emphasized adherence to legislative intent and the binding nature of Supreme Court decisions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 18 Apr 2019 12:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=524289" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 1007 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362180</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the demand for the period prior to 1st March 2006 and sustained the demand for the period thereafter, with the corresponding penalty. The exclusion of interest income from taxable value was upheld, but processing/management fees were deemed taxable. The judgment emphasized adherence to legislative intent and the binding nature of Supreme Court decisions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362180</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>