<?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 (11) TMI 1184 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762198</link>
    <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad held that when a service provider has already paid 100% service tax on manpower supply and security services, the service recipient cannot be demanded to pay service tax again on reverse charge basis. The tribunal ruled this would constitute impermissible double taxation on the same service. Since the service provider correctly paid the service tax, the recipient is entitled to Cenvat credit. Both the service tax demand and Cenvat credit demand against the appellant were held unsustainable. Appeal allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 13:23:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=779318" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1184 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762198</link>
      <description>CESTAT Ahmedabad held that when a service provider has already paid 100% service tax on manpower supply and security services, the service recipient cannot be demanded to pay service tax again on reverse charge basis. The tribunal ruled this would constitute impermissible double taxation on the same service. Since the service provider correctly paid the service tax, the recipient is entitled to Cenvat credit. Both the service tax demand and Cenvat credit demand against the appellant were held unsustainable. Appeal allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 25 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762198</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>