<?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>2006 (7) TMI 716 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281191</link>
    <description>Service tax credit was treated as admissible where the services were received, tax had been paid, and the services were used for the appellant&#039;s project in India. A Dubai address on the invoice was held not to be a relevant ground to deny credit by itself. On that basis, the appellant&#039;s claim was found prima facie well-founded, and recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 07 Jun 2019 10:32:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=574414" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2006 (7) TMI 716 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281191</link>
      <description>Service tax credit was treated as admissible where the services were received, tax had been paid, and the services were used for the appellant&#039;s project in India. A Dubai address on the invoice was held not to be a relevant ground to deny credit by itself. On that basis, the appellant&#039;s claim was found prima facie well-founded, and recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 25 Jul 2006 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281191</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>