<?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 (8) TMI 904 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346846</link>
    <description>For abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST, materials supplied free of cost by the service recipient were not required to be included in the gross value of commercial and industrial construction service. The Tribunal followed the Larger Bench ruling in Bhayana Builders and consistent later decisions, which treated such free-supplied materials as outside the taxable gross value for computing the abatement. The assessee was therefore entitled to the abatement.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 24 Aug 2017 07:53:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=486627" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (8) TMI 904 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346846</link>
      <description>For abatement under Notification No. 1/2006-ST, materials supplied free of cost by the service recipient were not required to be included in the gross value of commercial and industrial construction service. The Tribunal followed the Larger Bench ruling in Bhayana Builders and consistent later decisions, which treated such free-supplied materials as outside the taxable gross value for computing the abatement. The assessee was therefore entitled to the abatement.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 07 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=346846</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>