<?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>2009 (6) TMI 61 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34631</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, overturning the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and relieving the appellants from the imposed liabilities. The Tribunal found that the appellants did not meet the criteria to be classified as stock brokers under the relevant sections of the Finance Act, 1994, and did not provide taxable services as defined. Consequently, the demand for service tax, interest, and penalty was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73248" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (6) TMI 61 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34631</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, overturning the decision of the Commissioner (Appeals) and relieving the appellants from the imposed liabilities. The Tribunal found that the appellants did not meet the criteria to be classified as stock brokers under the relevant sections of the Finance Act, 1994, and did not provide taxable services as defined. Consequently, the demand for service tax, interest, and penalty was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 01 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34631</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>