<?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>2020 (6) TMI 227 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395852</link>
    <description>A statutory board constituted under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, was held not liable to service tax on activities undertaken in discharge of its statutory functions and the allied collections made in that course. The board&#039;s functions were confined to industrial area development, infrastructure creation, allotment of land and premises, and related acts carried out for public purposes under the statute and State Government directions. As the collections arose from these statutory duties and were not commercial services rendered in a private capacity, no taxable service existed and the demand for service tax, interest, and penalties could not stand.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 27 Feb 2021 11:54:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=614910" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 227 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395852</link>
      <description>A statutory board constituted under the Karnataka Industrial Areas Development Act, 1966, was held not liable to service tax on activities undertaken in discharge of its statutory functions and the allied collections made in that course. The board&#039;s functions were confined to industrial area development, infrastructure creation, allotment of land and premises, and related acts carried out for public purposes under the statute and State Government directions. As the collections arose from these statutory duties and were not commercial services rendered in a private capacity, no taxable service existed and the demand for service tax, interest, and penalties could not stand.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=395852</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>