<?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 (4) TMI 1035 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358924</link>
    <description>Exemption under Notification No. 12/2003 was available for repair and maintenance of damaged sea containers where invoices separately identified container numbers, labour charges and material charges, and service tax was shown only on the labour component. The cost of materials used in the repair work could not be added to the taxable value when the exemption applied, as supported by the Board clarification dated 22.09.2013 and the Supreme Court ruling in Jain Brothers. The fact that similar demands had been dropped in the appellant&#039;s other units also supported the claim. The inclusion of the material component was held unjustified, the order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 21 Apr 2018 06:01:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=517528" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (4) TMI 1035 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358924</link>
      <description>Exemption under Notification No. 12/2003 was available for repair and maintenance of damaged sea containers where invoices separately identified container numbers, labour charges and material charges, and service tax was shown only on the labour component. The cost of materials used in the repair work could not be added to the taxable value when the exemption applied, as supported by the Board clarification dated 22.09.2013 and the Supreme Court ruling in Jain Brothers. The fact that similar demands had been dropped in the appellant&#039;s other units also supported the claim. The inclusion of the material component was held unjustified, the order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=358924</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>