<?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 (2) TMI 1906 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293455</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim by the banking company for service tax paid under Works Contract Service. The Tribunal found that although the tax was initially misclassified, the appellant had indeed paid the tax and provided evidence through a certificate from a Chartered Accountant. Emphasizing substance over technicalities, the Tribunal granted the appeal with consequential relief, if applicable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2021 20:27:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=636102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1906 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293455</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the rejection of the refund claim by the banking company for service tax paid under Works Contract Service. The Tribunal found that although the tax was initially misclassified, the appellant had indeed paid the tax and provided evidence through a certificate from a Chartered Accountant. Emphasizing substance over technicalities, the Tribunal granted the appeal with consequential relief, if applicable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=293455</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>