<?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 (7) TMI 298 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32940</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi granted the waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalties to the applicant, totaling Rs. 14,30,320/-, in a case involving the classification of services as Information Technology Services or business auxiliary services. The Tribunal found in favor of the applicant, noting that their bill printing activities for the Electricity Board and Public Health Department did not constitute business auxiliary services as they only printed bills handed over to government departments for distribution. The Tribunal considered a similar case where the demand was set aside for another assessee engaged in the same activities, supporting the applicant&#039;s argument.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 12 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=71577" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (7) TMI 298 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32940</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT, New Delhi granted the waiver of pre-deposit of Service Tax and penalties to the applicant, totaling Rs. 14,30,320/-, in a case involving the classification of services as Information Technology Services or business auxiliary services. The Tribunal found in favor of the applicant, noting that their bill printing activities for the Electricity Board and Public Health Department did not constitute business auxiliary services as they only printed bills handed over to government departments for distribution. The Tribunal considered a similar case where the demand was set aside for another assessee engaged in the same activities, supporting the applicant&#039;s argument.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 30 Jul 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32940</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>