<?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 (7) TMI 95 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362787</link>
    <description>The Tribunal remanded the case involving M/s. Yespi Arts and M/s. Yespi Advertisers back to the adjudicating authority to determine the correct service tax liability. The issue of whether the appellants qualified as an &quot;advertisement agency&quot; was referred back to the Tribunal for further examination. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside, and the appellants were given three months to provide relevant materials for the computation of service tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jul 2018 09:24:43 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=525577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (7) TMI 95 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362787</link>
      <description>The Tribunal remanded the case involving M/s. Yespi Arts and M/s. Yespi Advertisers back to the adjudicating authority to determine the correct service tax liability. The issue of whether the appellants qualified as an &quot;advertisement agency&quot; was referred back to the Tribunal for further examination. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside, and the appellants were given three months to provide relevant materials for the computation of service tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=362787</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>