<?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 (8) TMI 90 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31833</link>
    <description>Services rendered within port premises by a licensed stevedore, where they go beyond pure stevedoring, were considered capable of falling within &quot;port services&quot; under the Finance Act, 1994. The order read the expression &quot;in any manner&quot; broadly and treated services performed within port limits by a port or an authorised person as potentially taxable as port services, without confining the definition by reference to Section 42(1) of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. It also noted that the earlier coordinate Bench view required reconsideration in light of the differing statutory scheme for major and minor ports, and therefore referred the matter for constitution of a Larger Bench without finally deciding the merits.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Jan 2009 19:24:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70479" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (8) TMI 90 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31833</link>
      <description>Services rendered within port premises by a licensed stevedore, where they go beyond pure stevedoring, were considered capable of falling within &quot;port services&quot; under the Finance Act, 1994. The order read the expression &quot;in any manner&quot; broadly and treated services performed within port limits by a port or an authorised person as potentially taxable as port services, without confining the definition by reference to Section 42(1) of the Major Port Trusts Act, 1963. It also noted that the earlier coordinate Bench view required reconsideration in light of the differing statutory scheme for major and minor ports, and therefore referred the matter for constitution of a Larger Bench without finally deciding the merits.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=31833</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>