<?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 (11) TMI 1143 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268334</link>
    <description>Construction of independent houses for a housing board or housing development organisation did not amount to &quot;construction of residential complex service&quot; under section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal applied its earlier ruling that independent houses remain outside the scope of a residential complex even where the number of units exceeds twelve. On that basis, the service tax demand was unsustainable and the adjudication order was quashed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 24 Nov 2015 14:15:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=406360" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2015 (11) TMI 1143 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268334</link>
      <description>Construction of independent houses for a housing board or housing development organisation did not amount to &quot;construction of residential complex service&quot; under section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal applied its earlier ruling that independent houses remain outside the scope of a residential complex even where the number of units exceeds twelve. On that basis, the service tax demand was unsustainable and the adjudication order was quashed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=268334</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>