https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368585 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for service tax. It classified activities related to laying pipelines for irrigation projects under works contract services rather than erection, commissioning, and installation services. The Tribunal also determined that construction of canals and pipelines for irrigation purposes should be classified under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service. Additionally, it clarified that turnkey projects should be classified based on the essential character of the service provided and exempted turnkey projects under CICS if primarily for non-commercial or non-industrial purposes. The Tribunal held that subcontracted works on a back-to-back basis do not constitute taxable service under works contract services if property transfer occurs to the employer/contractee. en-us Mon, 20 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 11 Oct 2018 09:11:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368585 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the demand for service tax. It classified activities related to laying pipelines for irrigation projects under works contract services rather than erection, commissioning, and installation services. The Tribunal also determined that construction of canals and pipelines for irrigation purposes should be classified under Commercial or Industrial Construction Service. Additionally, it clarified that turnkey projects should be classified based on the essential character of the service provided and exempted turnkey projects under CICS if primarily for non-commercial or non-industrial purposes. The Tribunal held that subcontracted works on a back-to-back basis do not constitute taxable service under works contract services if property transfer occurs to the employer/contractee. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 20 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368585