<?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>Revenue&#039;s demand for service tax on overseas group&#039;s deputation of employees denied for 1.7.2012-31.3.2015; not manpower supply</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93213</link>
    <description>CESTAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and affirmed the impugned order, thereby dropping the demand for service tax for the post-negative list period 1.7.2012-31.3.2015 in respect of &quot;manpower supply service&quot; allegedly provided by an overseas group entity to its Indian group company. The Tribunal held that the transactions constituted deputation/secondment of employees to execute the overseas principal&#039;s own contract and did not amount to supply of manpower by an agency; thus no taxable manpower recruitment or supply service arose. The CESTAT distinguished contrary apex court authority on facts and relied on prior tribunal and HC reasoning; the revenue&#039;s challenge was dismissed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 08:44:07 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 08:44:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=857520" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Revenue&#039;s demand for service tax on overseas group&#039;s deputation of employees denied for 1.7.2012-31.3.2015; not manpower supply</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93213</link>
      <description>CESTAT dismissed the revenue&#039;s appeal and affirmed the impugned order, thereby dropping the demand for service tax for the post-negative list period 1.7.2012-31.3.2015 in respect of &quot;manpower supply service&quot; allegedly provided by an overseas group entity to its Indian group company. The Tribunal held that the transactions constituted deputation/secondment of employees to execute the overseas principal&#039;s own contract and did not amount to supply of manpower by an agency; thus no taxable manpower recruitment or supply service arose. The CESTAT distinguished contrary apex court authority on facts and relied on prior tribunal and HC reasoning; the revenue&#039;s challenge was dismissed.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Oct 2025 08:44:07 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>