<?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>2011 (2) TMI 123 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203546</link>
    <description>Classification of services under an operation and maintenance agreement depended on whether the arrangement was properly taxed as maintenance or repair service, or as management, maintenance or repair service after the statutory definition was amended to include management of property. The record showed that the assessees had raised the composite-contract classification rule under section 65A and had urged an alternative classification, but the adjudication orders did not address that methodology or the competing pleas. Because the true character of the composite arrangement required examination of the full factual and legal matrix, the impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo adjudication; the limitation issue was left undecided.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Jun 2011 07:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=177102" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2011 (2) TMI 123 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203546</link>
      <description>Classification of services under an operation and maintenance agreement depended on whether the arrangement was properly taxed as maintenance or repair service, or as management, maintenance or repair service after the statutory definition was amended to include management of property. The record showed that the assessees had raised the composite-contract classification rule under section 65A and had urged an alternative classification, but the adjudication orders did not address that methodology or the competing pleas. Because the true character of the composite arrangement required examination of the full factual and legal matrix, the impugned orders were set aside and the matter was remanded for de novo adjudication; the limitation issue was left undecided.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 24 Feb 2011 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=203546</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>