<?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 (9) TMI 38 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31280</link>
    <description>In a service tax dispute concerning security services and repair and maintenance contract services, the tribunal found that the appellant had not established a sufficient prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. The appellant was directed to deposit the entire service tax amount within six weeks, and the appeal was to be taken up by the Commissioner (Appeals) only after compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 11 Jul 2009 17:19:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=69929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 38 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31280</link>
      <description>In a service tax dispute concerning security services and repair and maintenance contract services, the tribunal found that the appellant had not established a sufficient prima facie case for complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery. The appellant was directed to deposit the entire service tax amount within six weeks, and the appeal was to be taken up by the Commissioner (Appeals) only after compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 30 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31280</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>