<?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 (10) TMI 128 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32869</link>
    <description>Service tax demand on GTO services for the period 16-11-1997 to 1-6-1998 could not be sustained because the Tribunal applied Supreme Court rulings that show-cause notices under section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 were not maintainable against assessees liable only under section 71A and not under section 70. The demand rested on the same legal footing covered by those decisions, so the revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the levy was held unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 07 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71506" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 128 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32869</link>
      <description>Service tax demand on GTO services for the period 16-11-1997 to 1-6-1998 could not be sustained because the Tribunal applied Supreme Court rulings that show-cause notices under section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 were not maintainable against assessees liable only under section 71A and not under section 70. The demand rested on the same legal footing covered by those decisions, so the revenue&#039;s challenge failed and the levy was held unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32869</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>