<?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 (6) TMI 711 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754104</link>
    <description>CESTAT NEW DELHI held that the Commissioner erred in rejecting appellant&#039;s contention regarding service tax payment of Rs. 6,56,79,014/- under reverse charge mechanism for foreign consultancy services. The appellant had paid service tax on foreign remittances for consulting engineer services from overseas providers, with proper accounting code entries (00440057) and supporting challans. The Commissioner incorrectly dismissed the payment merely because it included contributions from other units of the appellant, despite the demand being based on foreign remittances. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner to properly examine appellant&#039;s contention and consider payments made by all units.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 18 Jun 2024 08:28:30 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=756668" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (6) TMI 711 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754104</link>
      <description>CESTAT NEW DELHI held that the Commissioner erred in rejecting appellant&#039;s contention regarding service tax payment of Rs. 6,56,79,014/- under reverse charge mechanism for foreign consultancy services. The appellant had paid service tax on foreign remittances for consulting engineer services from overseas providers, with proper accounting code entries (00440057) and supporting challans. The Commissioner incorrectly dismissed the payment merely because it included contributions from other units of the appellant, despite the demand being based on foreign remittances. The matter was remanded to the Commissioner to properly examine appellant&#039;s contention and consider payments made by all units.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 15 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754104</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>