<?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>2022 (10) TMI 694 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429136</link>
    <description>Under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, service tax on cable services is payable only on the consideration actually charged by each service provider for its own taxable service. In a revenue-sharing arrangement, the multi system operator supplied signals to local cable operators, while the local operators collected subscription from subscribers and used their own network to provide the service, so the operator was not taxable on amounts retained by the local cable operators. The disputed balance demand, denial of Cenvat credit and the limitation issue were remanded for fresh adjudication because the record was insufficiently analysed and further evidence was required.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Oct 2022 09:03:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=693658" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (10) TMI 694 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429136</link>
      <description>Under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994, service tax on cable services is payable only on the consideration actually charged by each service provider for its own taxable service. In a revenue-sharing arrangement, the multi system operator supplied signals to local cable operators, while the local operators collected subscription from subscribers and used their own network to provide the service, so the operator was not taxable on amounts retained by the local cable operators. The disputed balance demand, denial of Cenvat credit and the limitation issue were remanded for fresh adjudication because the record was insufficiently analysed and further evidence was required.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 12 Oct 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=429136</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>