<?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>2015 (1) TMI 186 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254987</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the applicant must make a pre-deposit for the disputed service tax on the construction of 24 flats, based on Rule 3 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The Tribunal rejected the argument to calculate tax solely on the land cost, emphasizing that the value should be determined as the gross amount charged for similar services. Compliance with the pre-deposit would result in the waiver of the remaining tax, interest, and penalty, with a stay on recovery pending appeal disposal.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 16 May 2016 14:56:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=373189" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (1) TMI 186 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254987</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the applicant must make a pre-deposit for the disputed service tax on the construction of 24 flats, based on Rule 3 of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The Tribunal rejected the argument to calculate tax solely on the land cost, emphasizing that the value should be determined as the gross amount charged for similar services. Compliance with the pre-deposit would result in the waiver of the remaining tax, interest, and penalty, with a stay on recovery pending appeal disposal.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 16 Oct 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254987</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>