<?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>2017 (12) TMI 1663 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278734</link>
    <description>Free supplies provided by the service recipient were held not to form part of the gross amount charged in construction service contracts, so they were not includible in the taxable value for abatement under Notification No. 1/2006. Applying the Larger Bench principle on identical wording, the Tribunal treated recipient-supplied materials as outside the taxable base and found denial of abatement unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2019 07:25:04 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=558679" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2017 (12) TMI 1663 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278734</link>
      <description>Free supplies provided by the service recipient were held not to form part of the gross amount charged in construction service contracts, so they were not includible in the taxable value for abatement under Notification No. 1/2006. Applying the Larger Bench principle on identical wording, the Tribunal treated recipient-supplied materials as outside the taxable base and found denial of abatement unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 22 Dec 2017 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=278734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>