<?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 (2) TMI 339 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31416</link>
    <description>A stay of the Commissioner (Appeals) order deleting service tax demand for the pre-16-6-05 period was refused because it would have revived the order-in-original and enabled recovery without adjudication on merits by the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the definition of &#039;maintenance and repair service&#039; was amended with effect from 16-6-05 and that the Commissioner (Appeals) had already deleted the pre-amendment demand while confirming the post-amendment demand, which had been separately waived in connected appeals. The stay application was therefore not entertained, and the appeals were directed to be tagged with the connected matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70063" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (2) TMI 339 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31416</link>
      <description>A stay of the Commissioner (Appeals) order deleting service tax demand for the pre-16-6-05 period was refused because it would have revived the order-in-original and enabled recovery without adjudication on merits by the Tribunal. The Tribunal noted that the definition of &#039;maintenance and repair service&#039; was amended with effect from 16-6-05 and that the Commissioner (Appeals) had already deleted the pre-amendment demand while confirming the post-amendment demand, which had been separately waived in connected appeals. The stay application was therefore not entertained, and the appeals were directed to be tagged with the connected matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 08 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31416</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>