<?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>2008 (2) TMI 175 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30031</link>
    <description>Service tax could not be demanded from an Indian recipient for commission agent services received from abroad for a period before Section 66A came into force, because no charging provision then existed to impose recipient liability on cross-border services. The related rule was amended only later, so the demand lacked temporal and statutory support for the disputed period. The demand was therefore set aside and the assessee succeeded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2014 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68692" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 175 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30031</link>
      <description>Service tax could not be demanded from an Indian recipient for commission agent services received from abroad for a period before Section 66A came into force, because no charging provision then existed to impose recipient liability on cross-border services. The related rule was amended only later, so the demand lacked temporal and statutory support for the disputed period. The demand was therefore set aside and the assessee succeeded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30031</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>