<?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 (9) TMI 1061 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367325</link>
    <description>Galvanization and powder coating of goods falling under Chapter 73 were treated as manufacture because Chapter Note 4 deems galvanization in relation to that chapter to be manufacturing activity. As Business Auxiliary Service excludes activities amounting to manufacture, the processing could not be taxed under that service category. The Tribunal also followed an earlier co-ordinate Bench view on the exemption claim and held the demand unsustainable, granting consequential relief.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Sep 2018 07:48:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534894" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 1061 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367325</link>
      <description>Galvanization and powder coating of goods falling under Chapter 73 were treated as manufacture because Chapter Note 4 deems galvanization in relation to that chapter to be manufacturing activity. As Business Auxiliary Service excludes activities amounting to manufacture, the processing could not be taxed under that service category. The Tribunal also followed an earlier co-ordinate Bench view on the exemption claim and held the demand unsustainable, granting consequential relief.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 07 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367325</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>