<?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>2019 (2) TMI 1569 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375942</link>
    <description>Amounts received as booking advances that were later refunded, and sums shown as loans or other creditors, were treated as outside service tax where no service was actually provided; the taxable component required re-determination after excluding amounts returned and any tax already paid. Demands based only on scribblings, loose computer entries or alleged cash income were held unsustainable in the absence of independent corroborative evidence. On Cenvat credit and works contract valuation, the proper course was to determine the correct differential tax liability rather than deny credit mechanically; the conceded small credit alone was confirmed, while the remaining valuation and credit issues were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 28 Feb 2019 06:59:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=560385" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1569 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375942</link>
      <description>Amounts received as booking advances that were later refunded, and sums shown as loans or other creditors, were treated as outside service tax where no service was actually provided; the taxable component required re-determination after excluding amounts returned and any tax already paid. Demands based only on scribblings, loose computer entries or alleged cash income were held unsustainable in the absence of independent corroborative evidence. On Cenvat credit and works contract valuation, the proper course was to determine the correct differential tax liability rather than deny credit mechanically; the conceded small credit alone was confirmed, while the remaining valuation and credit issues were remanded for reconsideration.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 27 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=375942</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>