<?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 (12) TMI 785 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372016</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the services provided did not fall under the category of &#039;Support Service of Business or Commerce&#039; but rather under &#039;support of tangible goods&#039; with effect from 16.5.2008. Consequently, the demand for service tax for the period before 16.5.2008 was deemed non-taxable under the Finance Act, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 17 Dec 2018 06:35:05 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547088" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 785 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372016</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the services provided did not fall under the category of &#039;Support Service of Business or Commerce&#039; but rather under &#039;support of tangible goods&#039; with effect from 16.5.2008. Consequently, the demand for service tax for the period before 16.5.2008 was deemed non-taxable under the Finance Act, leading to the setting aside of the impugned order in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372016</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>