<?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>2020 (1) TMI 942 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391329</link>
    <description>Vehicles specially fabricated for bullet and grenade protection, with defensive features and not primarily designed for transport, were classifiable under chapter heading 8705 90 00 and eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The bullet-proofing activity, involving supply of material on which VAT had been paid along with execution of work, was treated as Works Contract Service and not as Business Auxiliary Service. No service tax was payable on renting of immovable property for the relevant period because no consideration had been received, so the taxable event had not occurred. The demand and consequential penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 25 Jan 2020 10:35:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=601454" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2020 (1) TMI 942 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391329</link>
      <description>Vehicles specially fabricated for bullet and grenade protection, with defensive features and not primarily designed for transport, were classifiable under chapter heading 8705 90 00 and eligible for exemption under Notification No. 6/2006-CE. The bullet-proofing activity, involving supply of material on which VAT had been paid along with execution of work, was treated as Works Contract Service and not as Business Auxiliary Service. No service tax was payable on renting of immovable property for the relevant period because no consideration had been received, so the taxable event had not occurred. The demand and consequential penalties were therefore unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 21 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=391329</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>