<?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 (12) TMI 1274 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336629</link>
    <description>Service tax liability under erection, commissioning or installation service had to be examined work order-wise with reference to the statutory entry as it stood during the relevant period, because the scope of the taxable category changed over time. The record also indicated that several orders involved fabrication of structures and repair or replacement work, and fabrication that amounts to manufacture may fall outside the service tax levy under the disputed entry. On that basis, the existing findings were insufficient to sustain the demand finally, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after proper scrutiny of each work order and an effective opportunity of hearing.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 04 Jan 2017 10:31:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=452917" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (12) TMI 1274 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336629</link>
      <description>Service tax liability under erection, commissioning or installation service had to be examined work order-wise with reference to the statutory entry as it stood during the relevant period, because the scope of the taxable category changed over time. The record also indicated that several orders involved fabrication of structures and repair or replacement work, and fabrication that amounts to manufacture may fall outside the service tax levy under the disputed entry. On that basis, the existing findings were insufficient to sustain the demand finally, and the matter was remanded for fresh adjudication after proper scrutiny of each work order and an effective opportunity of hearing.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 13 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=336629</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>