<?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 (11) TMI 581 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334563</link>
    <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that the construction of staff quarters for Ghaziabad Development Authority did not attract service tax liability as it did not qualify as a residential complex under the relevant provisions. The decision was based on the interpretation of the statutory definition and supporting documentation, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in determining service tax obligations.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 16 Nov 2016 15:48:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=448106" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (11) TMI 581 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334563</link>
      <description>The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent, holding that the construction of staff quarters for Ghaziabad Development Authority did not attract service tax liability as it did not qualify as a residential complex under the relevant provisions. The decision was based on the interpretation of the statutory definition and supporting documentation, emphasizing the importance of concrete evidence in determining service tax obligations.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 31 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=334563</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>