<?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 49 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31498</link>
    <description>Service tax liability on the recipient of management consultancy and consulting engineer services received from a foreign firm was considered for the pre-1.1.2005 period. The Tribunal applied an earlier Larger Bench ruling on substantially identical facts and treated it as controlling, stating that service tax was not recoverable from the recipient for that period. On that basis, the demand and penalty were set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 29 Mar 2009 09:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70145" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (9) TMI 49 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31498</link>
      <description>Service tax liability on the recipient of management consultancy and consulting engineer services received from a foreign firm was considered for the pre-1.1.2005 period. The Tribunal applied an earlier Larger Bench ruling on substantially identical facts and treated it as controlling, stating that service tax was not recoverable from the recipient for that period. On that basis, the demand and penalty were set aside and consequential relief followed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Sep 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31498</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>