<?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 (8) TMI 30 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364558</link>
    <description>The tribunal overturned the Order-in-Original confirming a demand and penalties against a not-for-profit company in the domain name business. The case involved allegations of collecting charges for domain name registration services deemed taxable as franchise services. The tribunal found that the registrar accreditation agreement did not constitute a franchise service arrangement as defined in the Finance Act. It referenced relevant case laws to support its analysis and set aside the penalties imposed by the Department, ruling that the Show Cause Notice was wrongly served due to the absence of claimed services. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Aug 2018 15:21:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=528959" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (8) TMI 30 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364558</link>
      <description>The tribunal overturned the Order-in-Original confirming a demand and penalties against a not-for-profit company in the domain name business. The case involved allegations of collecting charges for domain name registration services deemed taxable as franchise services. The tribunal found that the registrar accreditation agreement did not constitute a franchise service arrangement as defined in the Finance Act. It referenced relevant case laws to support its analysis and set aside the penalties imposed by the Department, ruling that the Show Cause Notice was wrongly served due to the absence of claimed services. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was overturned.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364558</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>