<?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>2017 (4) TMI 903 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341933</link>
    <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s order. The agency fee received was deemed separate from the project cost, making it subject to service tax. The decision emphasized the distinction between construction contracts and consulting engineer services, reinforcing the need for accurate declaration of taxable services and justifying penalties for non-compliance.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 22 Sep 2017 10:55:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=466402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (4) TMI 903 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341933</link>
      <description>The Tribunal dismissed the appellant&#039;s appeal, upholding the Commissioner&#039;s order. The agency fee received was deemed separate from the project cost, making it subject to service tax. The decision emphasized the distinction between construction contracts and consulting engineer services, reinforcing the need for accurate declaration of taxable services and justifying penalties for non-compliance.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>