https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=6851 The court concluded that service tax could not be charged on composite contracts for purchase of under construction residential flats because the Act and Rules lacked a statutory machinery to segregate the service component; abatement notifications could not substitute for such machinery. Preferential location charges were regarded as value derived by purchasers from specific unit attributes and thus taxable. The court ordered refund of any service tax deposited under the challenged provisions with interest. A commentary observed existing valuation rules and composition schemes that had been used to determine taxable value and noted potential appellate challenge. en-us Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:19:57 +0530 Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:19:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=6851 The court concluded that service tax could not be charged on composite contracts for purchase of under construction residential flats because the Act and Rules lacked a statutory machinery to segregate the service component; abatement notifications could not substitute for such machinery. Preferential location charges were regarded as value derived by purchasers from specific unit attributes and thus taxable. The court ordered refund of any service tax deposited under the challenged provisions with interest. A commentary observed existing valuation rules and composition schemes that had been used to determine taxable value and noted potential appellate challenge. Articles Service Tax Fri, 10 Jun 2016 16:19:57 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/article/detailed?id=6851