<?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>2023 (1) TMI 189 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432442</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not liable for the service tax collected by another entity using the appellant&#039;s registration number, as the tax had already been paid. The Tribunal overturned the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) decisions, ruling that the appellant had discharged their service tax liability. The department&#039;s argument that the appellant remained liable was rejected, and the Tribunal granted relief to the appellant, setting aside the demand for the disputed services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 06 Jan 2023 09:32:07 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=700816" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (1) TMI 189 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432442</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellant was not liable for the service tax collected by another entity using the appellant&#039;s registration number, as the tax had already been paid. The Tribunal overturned the original authority and Commissioner (Appeals) decisions, ruling that the appellant had discharged their service tax liability. The department&#039;s argument that the appellant remained liable was rejected, and the Tribunal granted relief to the appellant, setting aside the demand for the disputed services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=432442</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>