<?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 (11) TMI 1154 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370811</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, determining that their auctioneering services before 1.5.2006 were not taxable under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS). The decision emphasized the difference between auctioneering and brokering activities and the timing of including auctioneering services in the taxable net. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits as per law.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 24 Nov 2018 07:25:09 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=543615" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (11) TMI 1154 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370811</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, determining that their auctioneering services before 1.5.2006 were not taxable under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS). The decision emphasized the difference between auctioneering and brokering activities and the timing of including auctioneering services in the taxable net. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with any consequential benefits as per law.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Sep 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370811</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>