<?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 (1) TMI 1593 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281868</link>
    <description>Construction under Madhuban Bapudham Yojana was held outside Residential Complex Service because the Revenue did not establish the statutory hallmarks of a residential complex, including common facilities such as a park, lift, community hall, parking space or sewage treatment facility. Services for establishment of an electrical sub-station were treated as covered by Notification No. 45/2010 dated 20.07.2010 and Notification No. 11/2010-ST dated 27.02.2010, so the levy did not survive. The demand based on purchase orders for the Ghaziabad Development Authority stadium property was also found unsustainable by applying binding precedent that the activity was not taxable service on the facts.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2019 06:37:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=578624" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (1) TMI 1593 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281868</link>
      <description>Construction under Madhuban Bapudham Yojana was held outside Residential Complex Service because the Revenue did not establish the statutory hallmarks of a residential complex, including common facilities such as a park, lift, community hall, parking space or sewage treatment facility. Services for establishment of an electrical sub-station were treated as covered by Notification No. 45/2010 dated 20.07.2010 and Notification No. 11/2010-ST dated 27.02.2010, so the levy did not survive. The demand based on purchase orders for the Ghaziabad Development Authority stadium property was also found unsustainable by applying binding precedent that the activity was not taxable service on the facts.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 18 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=281868</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>