<?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 (4) TMI 1202 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378758</link>
    <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi confirmed a service tax liability of Rs. 95.33 Lakhs against the appellant for laying pipelines under &quot;Commercial and Industrial Construction Services.&quot; The Tribunal held that activities related to laying pipelines for public welfare did not attract commercial service tax liability. It criticized the Commissioner&#039;s inconsistent classification and lack of justifiable principles. The Tribunal also found no demand for works contract services post a specific date and rejected the longer period of limitation invocation due to alleged suppression. The impugned order was set aside, allowing the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the importance of proper classification and evidence-based decisions in taxation matters.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 22 Apr 2019 07:44:47 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=567817" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (4) TMI 1202 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378758</link>
      <description>The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi confirmed a service tax liability of Rs. 95.33 Lakhs against the appellant for laying pipelines under &quot;Commercial and Industrial Construction Services.&quot; The Tribunal held that activities related to laying pipelines for public welfare did not attract commercial service tax liability. It criticized the Commissioner&#039;s inconsistent classification and lack of justifiable principles. The Tribunal also found no demand for works contract services post a specific date and rejected the longer period of limitation invocation due to alleged suppression. The impugned order was set aside, allowing the appeal with consequential relief, emphasizing the importance of proper classification and evidence-based decisions in taxation matters.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=378758</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>