<?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>2025 (9) TMI 933 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778444</link>
    <description>Labour supply was treated as manpower recruitment or supply agency service, and the applicable reverse-charge notifications placed the service tax burden entirely on the recipient for the period in dispute. As the demand was raised against the provider instead of the person liable under the notifications, the demand was held unsustainable and set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Sep 2025 08:31:46 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=850992" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (9) TMI 933 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778444</link>
      <description>Labour supply was treated as manpower recruitment or supply agency service, and the applicable reverse-charge notifications placed the service tax burden entirely on the recipient for the period in dispute. As the demand was raised against the provider instead of the person liable under the notifications, the demand was held unsustainable and set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=778444</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>