<?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 (6) TMI 185 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32943</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal in Kolkata confirmed the demand for service tax, education cess, and penalty, citing inclusion of transaction charges in service charges for tax calculation and lack of necessary details for Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal rejected the appellant&#039;s arguments that transaction charges should not be considered part of the service amount and upheld the requirement for pre-deposit, with partial waiver upon compliance with specified deposit terms.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 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=71580" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (6) TMI 185 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32943</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal in Kolkata confirmed the demand for service tax, education cess, and penalty, citing inclusion of transaction charges in service charges for tax calculation and lack of necessary details for Cenvat Credit. The Tribunal rejected the appellant&#039;s arguments that transaction charges should not be considered part of the service amount and upheld the requirement for pre-deposit, with partial waiver upon compliance with specified deposit terms.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jun 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32943</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>