<?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 (5) TMI 96 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30784</link>
    <description>For service tax purposes, classification depends on the substance of the functions performed, not the label used by the parties. Integrated receipt, storage, handling, dispatch and delivery of goods, with stock maintenance and transport arrangements for clients, fell within clearing and forwarding agent service, so the classification challenge failed. The valuation dispute over reimbursements, allied charges, stock verification and similar receipts required fresh factual examination to determine whether those amounts formed part of taxable value, so it was remanded. The extended period of limitation and the consequential liability to interest and penalties also depended on a fresh appraisal of the evidence, and those issues were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 24 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69438" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (5) TMI 96 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30784</link>
      <description>For service tax purposes, classification depends on the substance of the functions performed, not the label used by the parties. Integrated receipt, storage, handling, dispatch and delivery of goods, with stock maintenance and transport arrangements for clients, fell within clearing and forwarding agent service, so the classification challenge failed. The valuation dispute over reimbursements, allied charges, stock verification and similar receipts required fresh factual examination to determine whether those amounts formed part of taxable value, so it was remanded. The extended period of limitation and the consequential liability to interest and penalties also depended on a fresh appraisal of the evidence, and those issues were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 29 May 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30784</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>