<?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 1242 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372473</link>
    <description>The tribunal concluded that the assessee is not an intermediary under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. Therefore, the services provided are not subject to service tax in India. The refund claims filed by the assessee were deemed admissible. The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 24 Dec 2018 07:55:56 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=548632" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 1242 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372473</link>
      <description>The tribunal concluded that the assessee is not an intermediary under Rule 2(f) of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, 2012. Therefore, the services provided are not subject to service tax in India. The refund claims filed by the assessee were deemed admissible. The tribunal allowed the appeals filed by the assessee and dismissed the appeals filed by the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372473</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>