<?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>2010 (10) TMI 792 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208792</link>
    <description>Interpretation of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. was central to whether an assessee providing repairs and maintenance services can exclude the value of articles used in the service, and whether &quot;value of goods and materials sold&quot; covers goods and materials merely consumed during performance, including by deemed sale. The issue turned on the meaning of &quot;sold&quot; in the exemption notification and the existence of conflicting views among different Benches and Courts. Owing to those divergent authorities and the fact that a similar question had already been proposed for Larger Bench consideration in another matter, the question was referred to a Larger Bench for decision.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 31 May 2012 12:20:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=182251" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2010 (10) TMI 792 - CESTAT, BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208792</link>
      <description>Interpretation of Notification No. 12/2003-S.T. was central to whether an assessee providing repairs and maintenance services can exclude the value of articles used in the service, and whether &quot;value of goods and materials sold&quot; covers goods and materials merely consumed during performance, including by deemed sale. The issue turned on the meaning of &quot;sold&quot; in the exemption notification and the existence of conflicting views among different Benches and Courts. Owing to those divergent authorities and the fact that a similar question had already been proposed for Larger Bench consideration in another matter, the question was referred to a Larger Bench for decision.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Oct 2010 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=208792</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>