https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325599 Works contracts were treated as not liable to service tax for the period before 1.6.2007, with composite contracts covered by that settled principle; only pure sweat contracts required separate examination. The benefit of abatement could not be denied merely because the value of free supplies made by the service recipient was excluded from the assessable value, as assessable value had to be determined on the basis recognised in law for such contracts. The demand was therefore unsustainable for works contracts during the relevant period, subject only to fresh scrutiny of any contracts found to be pure sweat contracts. en-us Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Mar 2016 10:41:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325599 Works contracts were treated as not liable to service tax for the period before 1.6.2007, with composite contracts covered by that settled principle; only pure sweat contracts required separate examination. The benefit of abatement could not be denied merely because the value of free supplies made by the service recipient was excluded from the assessable value, as assessable value had to be determined on the basis recognised in law for such contracts. The demand was therefore unsustainable for works contracts during the relevant period, subject only to fresh scrutiny of any contracts found to be pure sweat contracts. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Feb 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=325599