<?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 (11) TMI 157 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33758</link>
    <description>A recipient of commission agent service from a foreign provider with no office in India was held liable to service tax only from 1-1-2005 under Notification No. 36/2004, following the Larger Bench view. Since the service tax and interest had already been deposited and liability from that date was accepted, the Tribunal remanded the matter only for quantification of the duty liability. Penalty was not finally decided and was left open for consideration before the original authority.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 09 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72387" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (11) TMI 157 - CESTAT, AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33758</link>
      <description>A recipient of commission agent service from a foreign provider with no office in India was held liable to service tax only from 1-1-2005 under Notification No. 36/2004, following the Larger Bench view. Since the service tax and interest had already been deposited and liability from that date was accepted, the Tribunal remanded the matter only for quantification of the duty liability. Penalty was not finally decided and was left open for consideration before the original authority.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>