<?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 (4) TMI 282 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32310</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, holding that service tax on manpower recruitment agency services was applicable only from 16-6-2005 onwards. The decision emphasized the distinction between recruitment and supply of manpower, affirming that the services provided fell under manpower supply rather than recruitment. The analysis of service terms and the evolution of the definition supported the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 20 Jun 2009 16:12:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=70951" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (4) TMI 282 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32310</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondents, holding that service tax on manpower recruitment agency services was applicable only from 16-6-2005 onwards. The decision emphasized the distinction between recruitment and supply of manpower, affirming that the services provided fell under manpower supply rather than recruitment. The analysis of service terms and the evolution of the definition supported the Tribunal&#039;s rejection of the Revenue&#039;s appeal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 29 Apr 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32310</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>