<?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 (7) TMI 59 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30650</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of Franch Express Network Pvt. Ltd. (FEN) in a service tax dispute, determining that the demand for service tax as a franchisor was not justified. It held that the relationship between FEN and its agents did not constitute a franchise arrangement as defined under the Act. The Tribunal found that FEN&#039;s agents were not franchisees but operated as part of FEN&#039;s courier agency service, leading to the conclusion that the service tax demand on FEN was unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and FEN&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 20 Mar 2014 14:58:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69305" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 59 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30650</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of Franch Express Network Pvt. Ltd. (FEN) in a service tax dispute, determining that the demand for service tax as a franchisor was not justified. It held that the relationship between FEN and its agents did not constitute a franchise arrangement as defined under the Act. The Tribunal found that FEN&#039;s agents were not franchisees but operated as part of FEN&#039;s courier agency service, leading to the conclusion that the service tax demand on FEN was unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside, and FEN&#039;s appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30650</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>