<?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 (5) TMI 71 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34932</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants did not provide &quot;clearing and forwarding&quot; services as defined under the law. As the goods were dispatched directly to depots/branches and the appellants only shared sales and distribution expenses, they were not liable to pay service tax under that category. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 12 Jan 2010 12:42:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=73542" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (5) TMI 71 - CESTAT, CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34932</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the appellants did not provide &quot;clearing and forwarding&quot; services as defined under the law. As the goods were dispatched directly to depots/branches and the appellants only shared sales and distribution expenses, they were not liable to pay service tax under that category. The impugned orders were set aside, and the appeals were allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=34932</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>