<?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>2021 (7) TMI 251 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409409</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the convenience fee charged for online booking of movie tickets did not fall under taxable OIDAR services. It concluded that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked due to the lack of wilful suppression of facts to evade tax. As a result, the demand for service tax, penalty, and interest was set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Dec 2021 17:28:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=648945" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2021 (7) TMI 251 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409409</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the convenience fee charged for online booking of movie tickets did not fall under taxable OIDAR services. It concluded that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked due to the lack of wilful suppression of facts to evade tax. As a result, the demand for service tax, penalty, and interest was set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 05 Jul 2021 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=409409</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>