<?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>2007 (8) TMI 79 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2430</link>
    <description>A composite works contract could not be split into separate components and taxed item-wise for service tax purposes. The Tribunal followed its earlier order in the same assessee&#039;s case, which had already held that such a contract cannot be vivisected for piecemeal taxation. As the factual matrix remained the same, no different view was taken in the present appeal, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Apr 2008 08:30:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=41789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2007 (8) TMI 79 - CESTAT, KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2430</link>
      <description>A composite works contract could not be split into separate components and taxed item-wise for service tax purposes. The Tribunal followed its earlier order in the same assessee&#039;s case, which had already held that such a contract cannot be vivisected for piecemeal taxation. As the factual matrix remained the same, no different view was taken in the present appeal, and the issue was decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 13 Aug 2007 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=2430</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>