<?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 (5) TMI 1025 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791823</link>
    <description>Placement facilitation by an educational institution was held not to fall within Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service where fees were collected from students and not from recruiting employers. The charging provision was read as requiring a client-service provider relationship involving recruitment or supply of manpower, with consideration flowing from the employer or prospective employer. On the facts stated, students were not the clients contemplated by the levy, and the activity was limited to facilitating interaction between students and employers. The circular relied on by the Revenue could not expand the scope of the charging provision, so the demand was treated as unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 May 2026 08:18:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=902710" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1025 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791823</link>
      <description>Placement facilitation by an educational institution was held not to fall within Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency Service where fees were collected from students and not from recruiting employers. The charging provision was read as requiring a client-service provider relationship involving recruitment or supply of manpower, with consideration flowing from the employer or prospective employer. On the facts stated, students were not the clients contemplated by the levy, and the activity was limited to facilitating interaction between students and employers. The circular relied on by the Revenue could not expand the scope of the charging provision, so the demand was treated as unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791823</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>