<?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 753 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367017</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax on commission received by the appellant for sale and purchase of goods under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. The Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the demand but the appellant challenged this decision. Despite citing a pending appeal before the Delhi High Court on a similar issue, the Tribunal relied on precedent and dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 14 Sep 2018 07:46:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534301" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 753 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367017</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the demand for service tax on commission received by the appellant for sale and purchase of goods under the category of Business Auxiliary Service. The Commissioner (Appeals) reduced the demand but the appellant challenged this decision. Despite citing a pending appeal before the Delhi High Court on a similar issue, the Tribunal relied on precedent and dismissed the appeal, affirming the Commissioner&#039;s decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 20 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367017</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>