<?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 (8) TMI 1337 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757633</link>
    <description>Consultancy-oriented services involving advisory support, due diligence, mergers and acquisitions assistance, financial viability studies and diagnostic reviews were held to fall under management or business consultant services rather than chartered accountant services or market research agency services, because the provider was an incorporated company and market analysis was only incidental. The services were treated as export of service under the Export of Service Rules, 2005 since the contractual counterparty was overseas, the reports were delivered and used abroad, and consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange. In the absence of fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement, the extended limitation period could not be invoked on a mere classification dispute, so the demand, interest and penalty were not sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2024 16:25:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=765821" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1337 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757633</link>
      <description>Consultancy-oriented services involving advisory support, due diligence, mergers and acquisitions assistance, financial viability studies and diagnostic reviews were held to fall under management or business consultant services rather than chartered accountant services or market research agency services, because the provider was an incorporated company and market analysis was only incidental. The services were treated as export of service under the Export of Service Rules, 2005 since the contractual counterparty was overseas, the reports were delivered and used abroad, and consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange. In the absence of fraud, suppression or wilful misstatement, the extended limitation period could not be invoked on a mere classification dispute, so the demand, interest and penalty were not sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757633</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>