<?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>2016 (4) TMI 692 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326578</link>
    <description>The High Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration following a challenge by the appellant regarding the direction to deposit a specific amount. The appellant&#039;s argument centered on the classification of services provided as Works Contract services rather than Commercial and Industrial Construction Services. Despite past claims and attempts for relief, the Tribunal upheld the liability for service tax under Works Contract Services based on the appellant&#039;s service classification. The appellant agreed to deposit the specified amount within a set time frame to avoid appeal dismissal for non-compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 19 Nov 2016 18:29:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=424333" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (4) TMI 692 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326578</link>
      <description>The High Court remanded the matter for fresh consideration following a challenge by the appellant regarding the direction to deposit a specific amount. The appellant&#039;s argument centered on the classification of services provided as Works Contract services rather than Commercial and Industrial Construction Services. Despite past claims and attempts for relief, the Tribunal upheld the liability for service tax under Works Contract Services based on the appellant&#039;s service classification. The appellant agreed to deposit the specified amount within a set time frame to avoid appeal dismissal for non-compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Mar 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=326578</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>