<?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 419 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396044</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the taxability of service tax on subcontractors based on the Larger Bench decision, dismissed the appeal on merit, but limited the demand period due to the absence of fraudulent intent. The judgment emphasized the importance of legal interpretation and bona fide beliefs in tax disputes, providing relief to the appellants in this case.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 19 Jun 2020 16:19:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=615470" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (6) TMI 419 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396044</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the taxability of service tax on subcontractors based on the Larger Bench decision, dismissed the appeal on merit, but limited the demand period due to the absence of fraudulent intent. The judgment emphasized the importance of legal interpretation and bona fide beliefs in tax disputes, providing relief to the appellants in this case.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2020 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=396044</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>