<?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 (9) TMI 649 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366913</link>
    <description>A service tax demand was held unsustainable because the adjudication order confirmed liability under Business Auxiliary Service even though the show cause notice had proposed tax under Advertising Services. The confirmation travelled beyond the scope of the notice, and a demand cannot be sustained on a taxable head or legal basis materially different from that alleged in the notice. On that jurisdictional defect, the demand and impugned order were set aside without examining the merits of taxability of the incentives.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Sep 2018 08:18:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534116" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 649 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366913</link>
      <description>A service tax demand was held unsustainable because the adjudication order confirmed liability under Business Auxiliary Service even though the show cause notice had proposed tax under Advertising Services. The confirmation travelled beyond the scope of the notice, and a demand cannot be sustained on a taxable head or legal basis materially different from that alleged in the notice. On that jurisdictional defect, the demand and impugned order were set aside without examining the merits of taxability of the incentives.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366913</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>