<?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 (9) TMI 993 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348236</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the sub-contractor is liable to pay service tax on services provided, even if the main contractor had paid the tax, based on a CBEC Circular clarifying subcontractors&#039; liability. The Tribunal found the consideration of additional documents by the Commissioner (Appeals) unjustified as they were not submitted before the original authority. Part of the service tax demand was barred by the limitation of time, and the extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the absence of willful suppression or fraud. The matter was remanded for computation within the normal limitation period, with no penalties imposed on the respondents.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Sep 2017 10:19:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=489824" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (9) TMI 993 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348236</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the sub-contractor is liable to pay service tax on services provided, even if the main contractor had paid the tax, based on a CBEC Circular clarifying subcontractors&#039; liability. The Tribunal found the consideration of additional documents by the Commissioner (Appeals) unjustified as they were not submitted before the original authority. Part of the service tax demand was barred by the limitation of time, and the extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to the absence of willful suppression or fraud. The matter was remanded for computation within the normal limitation period, with no penalties imposed on the respondents.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 13 Jul 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348236</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>