<?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 (3) TMI 1100 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377079</link>
    <description>The Tribunal determined that the leasing transactions in question were Operating Leases, not subject to service tax, based on the distinction between Financial and Operating Leases as outlined in the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant&#039;s transactions were found to meet the criteria of Operating Leases, where ownership and risks remained with the lessor. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 Mar 2019 06:36:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=563743" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (3) TMI 1100 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377079</link>
      <description>The Tribunal determined that the leasing transactions in question were Operating Leases, not subject to service tax, based on the distinction between Financial and Operating Leases as outlined in the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant&#039;s transactions were found to meet the criteria of Operating Leases, where ownership and risks remained with the lessor. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeals were allowed with consequential reliefs.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=377079</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>