https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338205 The appellant successfully argued that service tax was not payable on the entire gross value of retreading charges, as service tax was already paid on the retreading charges received from customers. The court clarified that retreading of tires constitutes a Works Contract, where goods used in the contract are liable to sales tax but not service tax. The judgments established that service tax is only applicable to the service aspect under the Union List, and the State government cannot impose sales tax on it. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, directing no service tax levy on the value of goods used in tire retreading, with a refund of taxes paid under protest granted. en-us Thu, 27 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Sep 2017 10:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338205 The appellant successfully argued that service tax was not payable on the entire gross value of retreading charges, as service tax was already paid on the retreading charges received from customers. The court clarified that retreading of tires constitutes a Works Contract, where goods used in the contract are liable to sales tax but not service tax. The judgments established that service tax is only applicable to the service aspect under the Union List, and the State government cannot impose sales tax on it. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, directing no service tax levy on the value of goods used in tire retreading, with a refund of taxes paid under protest granted. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 27 Oct 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=338205