<?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 (6) TMI 1539 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291200</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on reimbursements from customers for expenses incurred on their behalf. The reliance on a Trade Notice for the tax demand was deemed invalid as it lacked statutory backing. The judgment emphasized the necessity of statutory support for tax demands and restricted the interpretive scope of Trade Notices or Circulars. The decision did not address the issue of limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Oct 2020 19:17:28 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=626668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (6) TMI 1539 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291200</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, ruling that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on reimbursements from customers for expenses incurred on their behalf. The reliance on a Trade Notice for the tax demand was deemed invalid as it lacked statutory backing. The judgment emphasized the necessity of statutory support for tax demands and restricted the interpretive scope of Trade Notices or Circulars. The decision did not address the issue of limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=291200</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>