<?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 (10) TMI 1151 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387667</link>
    <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the demand for service tax on the construction of a residential complex. It was determined that the construction activities did not fall under the definition of taxable service at the material time and only became taxable after a specific amendment in 2010. Citing relevant case laws, including a previous decision in a similar matter, the Tribunal emphasized that no taxable service was provided when a builder undertakes construction for its own self without a service provider-recipient relationship. The appeal was allowed based on consistent legal principles and the non-retrospective effect of the relevant explanation in the Finance Act.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Oct 2019 19:07:10 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=592340" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (10) TMI 1151 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387667</link>
      <description>The Tribunal allowed the appeal against the demand for service tax on the construction of a residential complex. It was determined that the construction activities did not fall under the definition of taxable service at the material time and only became taxable after a specific amendment in 2010. Citing relevant case laws, including a previous decision in a similar matter, the Tribunal emphasized that no taxable service was provided when a builder undertakes construction for its own self without a service provider-recipient relationship. The appeal was allowed based on consistent legal principles and the non-retrospective effect of the relevant explanation in the Finance Act.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Oct 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=387667</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>