<?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 1663 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367927</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that selling and delivering food did not constitute outdoor catering service as there was no personalized service element involved. The demand for service tax was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=536276" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1663 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367927</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that selling and delivering food did not constitute outdoor catering service as there was no personalized service element involved. The demand for service tax was deemed unsustainable, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367927</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>