<?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>2023 (8) TMI 186 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441207</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the service tax demand for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12 concerning the renting of immovable properties but set aside the demand for the financial year 2012-13 from July to March due to the activity not attracting service tax liability post the introduction of Section 66D in the Finance Act. Consequently, the order was modified, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 03 Aug 2023 18:15:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721549" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 186 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441207</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the service tax demand for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12 concerning the renting of immovable properties but set aside the demand for the financial year 2012-13 from July to March due to the activity not attracting service tax liability post the introduction of Section 66D in the Finance Act. Consequently, the order was modified, and the appeal was partly allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 28 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441207</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>