<?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>2014 (1) TMI 40 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241815</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery to the appellant in a case concerning the classification of services under &#039;Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service&#039; or &#039;Works Contract Service&#039;. The dispute arose due to the inclusion of &#039;works contract service&#039; in taxable services. The Tribunal classified the activities under works contract service for service tax levy, emphasizing the importance of Rule 2A in determining the value of works contract service. The Tribunal did not give significant weight to a previous Larger Bench decision, focusing instead on the application of Rule 2A for valuation purposes.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 15 Nov 2013 10:59:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341456" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 40 - CESTAT BANGALORE</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241815</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery to the appellant in a case concerning the classification of services under &#039;Erection, Commissioning and Installation Service&#039; or &#039;Works Contract Service&#039;. The dispute arose due to the inclusion of &#039;works contract service&#039; in taxable services. The Tribunal classified the activities under works contract service for service tax levy, emphasizing the importance of Rule 2A in determining the value of works contract service. The Tribunal did not give significant weight to a previous Larger Bench decision, focusing instead on the application of Rule 2A for valuation purposes.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 12 Apr 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241815</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>