<?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 (8) TMI 1196 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192122</link>
    <description>Construction activity taxability as a works contract required reconsideration because the original adjudication preceded the later Supreme Court ruling on works contract classification. The Tribunal accepted that the dispute should be examined afresh in light of that subsequent legal position and remanded the matter for de novo adjudication. The adjudicating authority was directed to decide the taxability issue again on the basis of the applicable legal principles.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 15 May 2017 13:42:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=468689" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2016 (8) TMI 1196 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192122</link>
      <description>Construction activity taxability as a works contract required reconsideration because the original adjudication preceded the later Supreme Court ruling on works contract classification. The Tribunal accepted that the dispute should be examined afresh in light of that subsequent legal position and remanded the matter for de novo adjudication. The adjudicating authority was directed to decide the taxability issue again on the basis of the applicable legal principles.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 19 Aug 2016 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=192122</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>