<?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>2012 (7) TMI 319 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214746</link>
    <description>Construction by a developer on its own land for residential plots, followed by sale of the completed units to buyers, was not treated as a taxable service under service tax law because the essential service provider-service recipient relationship was absent. The amounts received from prospective buyers were characterised as sale consideration for the completed property, not consideration for any service. The reasoning accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) was that self-construction for eventual sale, without a service relationship, does not fall within service tax. The activity was therefore not exigible to service tax, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2013 15:53:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=188138" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2012 (7) TMI 319 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214746</link>
      <description>Construction by a developer on its own land for residential plots, followed by sale of the completed units to buyers, was not treated as a taxable service under service tax law because the essential service provider-service recipient relationship was absent. The amounts received from prospective buyers were characterised as sale consideration for the completed property, not consideration for any service. The reasoning accepted by the Commissioner (Appeals) was that self-construction for eventual sale, without a service relationship, does not fall within service tax. The activity was therefore not exigible to service tax, and the Revenue&#039;s appeal failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Jun 2012 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=214746</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>