<?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 (11) TMI 1166 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388917</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s C&amp;amp;F and transportation services should not be clubbed for service tax purposes, as they were distinct under separate agreements. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding the impugned order unsustainable, and provided consequential benefits. Other grounds raised were not addressed. The order was pronounced on 26.11.2019.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 27 Nov 2019 12:03:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=595454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (11) TMI 1166 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388917</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant&#039;s C&amp;amp;F and transportation services should not be clubbed for service tax purposes, as they were distinct under separate agreements. The Tribunal allowed the appeal, finding the impugned order unsustainable, and provided consequential benefits. Other grounds raised were not addressed. The order was pronounced on 26.11.2019.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388917</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>