<?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 1868 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289776</link>
    <description>Replacing old AC/CGI sheet roofing with profile sheets in functioning godowns was treated as a composite contract of replacement, maintenance, repairs and renewal, not an original works contract; service tax was therefore payable on 70% of the relevant gross contract value. The Court also held that a clause stating rates were inclusive of taxes did not clearly shift the respondents&#039; statutory share of service tax to the petitioner. On a harmonious reading of the contract and the tax notification, the respondents could not deduct their share of service tax from the petitioner&#039;s bills, and the amounts already deducted were directed to be refunded.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Feb 2021 12:16:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=620174" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (2) TMI 1868 - GAUHATI HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289776</link>
      <description>Replacing old AC/CGI sheet roofing with profile sheets in functioning godowns was treated as a composite contract of replacement, maintenance, repairs and renewal, not an original works contract; service tax was therefore payable on 70% of the relevant gross contract value. The Court also held that a clause stating rates were inclusive of taxes did not clearly shift the respondents&#039; statutory share of service tax to the petitioner. On a harmonious reading of the contract and the tax notification, the respondents could not deduct their share of service tax from the petitioner&#039;s bills, and the amounts already deducted were directed to be refunded.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Feb 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=289776</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>