<?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 (2) TMI 1495 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375868</link>
    <description>Marine training courses were treated as falling within the exclusion for courses leading to a certificate recognised by law where the completion certificate derived legal efficacy from the maritime regulatory framework under the Merchant Shipping Act and the DG Shipping approval regime, so the training was not taxable as commercial training or coaching service. For consulting engineer services received from abroad, reverse charge service tax applied only from 18.04.2006, when section 66A was introduced, and the taxable value had to exclude reimbursable expenses. The demand therefore survived only for the legally permissible post-18.04.2006 period, with valuation requiring recomputation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 10:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560149" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1495 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375868</link>
      <description>Marine training courses were treated as falling within the exclusion for courses leading to a certificate recognised by law where the completion certificate derived legal efficacy from the maritime regulatory framework under the Merchant Shipping Act and the DG Shipping approval regime, so the training was not taxable as commercial training or coaching service. For consulting engineer services received from abroad, reverse charge service tax applied only from 18.04.2006, when section 66A was introduced, and the taxable value had to exclude reimbursable expenses. The demand therefore survived only for the legally permissible post-18.04.2006 period, with valuation requiring recomputation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>