<?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 (6) TMI 252 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361425</link>
    <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision that the services provided by the appellant to Jaipur Development Authority did not qualify as &#039;Works Contract Services&#039; but rather as &#039;Commercial or Industrial Construction Service&#039;. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the liability for service tax on the work orders executed during 2006-07 to 2008-09.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2018 07:57:21 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=522673" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (6) TMI 252 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361425</link>
      <description>The Tribunal upheld the lower authorities&#039; decision that the services provided by the appellant to Jaipur Development Authority did not qualify as &#039;Works Contract Services&#039; but rather as &#039;Commercial or Industrial Construction Service&#039;. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the liability for service tax on the work orders executed during 2006-07 to 2008-09.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361425</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>