<?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 (7) TMI 1780 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294607</link>
    <description>Composite works activity required fresh examination in light of Larsen &amp; Toubro, because the earlier adjudication had not applied the later Supreme Court ruling and the taxability had to be tested on the correct legal footing; the issue was remanded for de novo decision. The transport of goods by road demand was also sent back, as the adjudicating authority had itself identified a computational error and the demand needed reconsideration against the taxable service and claimed exclusions. Renting of immovable property service and the related penalty were likewise remitted for fresh adjudication, since the tax and penalty position had not been fully addressed in the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 23 Apr 2021 21:02:44 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=642526" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (7) TMI 1780 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294607</link>
      <description>Composite works activity required fresh examination in light of Larsen &amp; Toubro, because the earlier adjudication had not applied the later Supreme Court ruling and the taxability had to be tested on the correct legal footing; the issue was remanded for de novo decision. The transport of goods by road demand was also sent back, as the adjudicating authority had itself identified a computational error and the demand needed reconsideration against the taxable service and claimed exclusions. Renting of immovable property service and the related penalty were likewise remitted for fresh adjudication, since the tax and penalty position had not been fully addressed in the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 10 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=294607</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>