<?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 (10) TMI 772 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333752</link>
    <description>The Tribunal concluded that services provided by the assessee to HPCL were correctly classified as work contract services from 1.6.2007 onwards. Therefore, no service tax demand was applicable for the period up to 31.5.2007. The matter was remanded for reconsideration in line with legal precedent, emphasizing the composite nature of the contract involving both goods supply and services. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) decision and directed a reassessment based on the classification of services as work contract services.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 22 Oct 2016 19:52:59 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=445653" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (10) TMI 772 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333752</link>
      <description>The Tribunal concluded that services provided by the assessee to HPCL were correctly classified as work contract services from 1.6.2007 onwards. Therefore, no service tax demand was applicable for the period up to 31.5.2007. The matter was remanded for reconsideration in line with legal precedent, emphasizing the composite nature of the contract involving both goods supply and services. The Tribunal set aside the Commissioner (Appeals) decision and directed a reassessment based on the classification of services as work contract services.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 06 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=333752</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>