<?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 (12) TMI 253 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371484</link>
    <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal in a case concerning the interpretation of bundled services under Section 66F of the Finance Act, 1994 for construction of a residential complex service. The charges in question were considered integral to the main service as they were not separately contracted and were essential for the construction, leading to their inclusion in the bundled service.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 05 Dec 2018 07:48:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=545560" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 253 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371484</link>
      <description>The Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal in a case concerning the interpretation of bundled services under Section 66F of the Finance Act, 1994 for construction of a residential complex service. The charges in question were considered integral to the main service as they were not separately contracted and were essential for the construction, leading to their inclusion in the bundled service.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 19 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371484</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>