<?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>2026 (4) TMI 213 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789144</link>
    <description>Trading in cargo space on a principal-to-principal basis was held not to be a taxable service, so profit and shipping discounts could not be taxed as Business Auxiliary Service. Independent goods transport activity, supported by separate billing and challans, could not be clubbed with clearing and forwarding service to deny GTA abatement, so the abatement remained available. The exclusion for motor-vehicle-related input services introduced by the amended Cenvat credit rules could not be applied retrospectively to the pre-amendment period, and no surviving demand remained where tax on the disputed amount had already been discharged. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee obtained consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 04 Apr 2026 08:53:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=895015" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 213 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789144</link>
      <description>Trading in cargo space on a principal-to-principal basis was held not to be a taxable service, so profit and shipping discounts could not be taxed as Business Auxiliary Service. Independent goods transport activity, supported by separate billing and challans, could not be clubbed with clearing and forwarding service to deny GTA abatement, so the abatement remained available. The exclusion for motor-vehicle-related input services introduced by the amended Cenvat credit rules could not be applied retrospectively to the pre-amendment period, and no surviving demand remained where tax on the disputed amount had already been discharged. The impugned order was set aside and the assessee obtained consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789144</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>