<?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>2024 (2) TMI 84 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448933</link>
    <description>CESTAT Chennai set aside service tax demands raised against garment exporter under Business Auxiliary Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service. The department alleged appellant received services from M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai through their agent M/s. Fashion Force for quality checking of exported garments. Tribunal held no service was rendered to appellant as JPS Trading acted as buying agent for German buyer, not commission agent for appellant. No payment was made by appellant to Fashion Force, and service provider-receiver were both in non-taxable territory. Demand lacked factual and legal basis. Appeal allowed, following precedents in similar export cases.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 01 Feb 2024 16:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=742172" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 84 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448933</link>
      <description>CESTAT Chennai set aside service tax demands raised against garment exporter under Business Auxiliary Service and Technical Inspection and Certification Service. The department alleged appellant received services from M/s. JPS Trading, Dubai through their agent M/s. Fashion Force for quality checking of exported garments. Tribunal held no service was rendered to appellant as JPS Trading acted as buying agent for German buyer, not commission agent for appellant. No payment was made by appellant to Fashion Force, and service provider-receiver were both in non-taxable territory. Demand lacked factual and legal basis. Appeal allowed, following precedents in similar export cases.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>