<?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>2009 (4) TMI 788 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130035</link>
    <description>A prima facie case justified complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in a service tax dispute involving works contract classification. The appellants relied on Tribunal rulings that activity falling within the later works contract category could not be taxed under an earlier category for the prior period, and that a works contract could not be vivisected for service tax purposes. The dispute also involved denial of abatement under an exemption notification, but the record showed sufficient prima facie support that the activity was part of a works contract not exigible during the material period. Recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 17 Apr 2013 09:58:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=165927" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2009 (4) TMI 788 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130035</link>
      <description>A prima facie case justified complete waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery in a service tax dispute involving works contract classification. The appellants relied on Tribunal rulings that activity falling within the later works contract category could not be taxed under an earlier category for the prior period, and that a works contract could not be vivisected for service tax purposes. The dispute also involved denial of abatement under an exemption notification, but the record showed sufficient prima facie support that the activity was part of a works contract not exigible during the material period. Recovery was stayed pending disposal of the appeals.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2009 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130035</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>