<?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>2019 (1) TMI 445 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373280</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to drop service tax proceedings against the respondent in a case involving TV and Radio Programme Production Service. The appeal by Revenue was dismissed as the evidence indicated a joint venture with revenue sharing, not production exclusively for another party. The MOU between the parties clarified the arrangement, showing the respondent retained copyright and had the right to commercially exploit the programmes, aligning with the definition of Programme producers under the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal, concluding that further investigation was unwarranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 10 Jun 2019 14:38:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=552142" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 445 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373280</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner&#039;s decision to drop service tax proceedings against the respondent in a case involving TV and Radio Programme Production Service. The appeal by Revenue was dismissed as the evidence indicated a joint venture with revenue sharing, not production exclusively for another party. The MOU between the parties clarified the arrangement, showing the respondent retained copyright and had the right to commercially exploit the programmes, aligning with the definition of Programme producers under the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal found no merit in the appeal, concluding that further investigation was unwarranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 08 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>