<?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>2018 (3) TMI 698 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356995</link>
    <description>The Tribunal confirmed the classification of services as Works Contract for the entire duration, setting aside penalties imposed on the assessee due to legal interpretation uncertainties. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeal against demands set aside for a specific period, citing a favorable Supreme Court precedent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Mar 2018 08:35:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=512929" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (3) TMI 698 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356995</link>
      <description>The Tribunal confirmed the classification of services as Works Contract for the entire duration, setting aside penalties imposed on the assessee due to legal interpretation uncertainties. Additionally, the Tribunal rejected the Revenue&#039;s appeal against demands set aside for a specific period, citing a favorable Supreme Court precedent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 19 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=356995</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>