<?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 (5) TMI 832 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752779</link>
    <description>CESTAT Mumbai held that ship crew recruitment services provided to a Singapore-based entity constituted export of services, not intermediary services, and were therefore not liable to service tax. The tribunal found that the appellant operated on a principal-to-principal basis, receiving payment in foreign currency for services including crew selection, medical testing, and transportation. The services fell outside India&#039;s taxable territory under Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. The tribunal also ruled that extended period of limitation was improperly invoked without evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. The order was set aside and appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 May 2024 10:37:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=753490" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (5) TMI 832 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752779</link>
      <description>CESTAT Mumbai held that ship crew recruitment services provided to a Singapore-based entity constituted export of services, not intermediary services, and were therefore not liable to service tax. The tribunal found that the appellant operated on a principal-to-principal basis, receiving payment in foreign currency for services including crew selection, medical testing, and transportation. The services fell outside India&#039;s taxable territory under Place of Provision of Service Rules, 2012. The tribunal also ruled that extended period of limitation was improperly invoked without evidence of suppression or willful misstatement. The order was set aside and appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 14 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=752779</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>