<?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 (4) TMI 72 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30033</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, ruled on stay applications regarding the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty. The dispute centered on whether establishment expenses reimbursed by the company should be excluded from service tax calculation for business auxiliary services provided to a petroleum company. The Tribunal found that previous decisions cited by the applicants were not directly applicable and directed them to deposit additional amounts based on a previous stay order. Compliance with the directive would result in the waiver of the remaining service tax and penalties, emphasizing the importance of contract specifics and precedent in determining tax liability.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=68694" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 72 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30033</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi, ruled on stay applications regarding the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalty. The dispute centered on whether establishment expenses reimbursed by the company should be excluded from service tax calculation for business auxiliary services provided to a petroleum company. The Tribunal found that previous decisions cited by the applicants were not directly applicable and directed them to deposit additional amounts based on a previous stay order. Compliance with the directive would result in the waiver of the remaining service tax and penalties, emphasizing the importance of contract specifics and precedent in determining tax liability.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 17 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30033</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>