<?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>The judgment set aside the order demanding tax for various services, including &#039;commercial and industrial construction service,&#039; &#039;management, maintenance or repair service,&#039; and &#039;transport of goods by road service.&#039; The demand for &#039;site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolition service&#039; was partially confirmed. The appellant&#039;s appeal focused on this service, while the Revenue&#039;s appeal centered on the dropping of demand for &#039;transport of goods by road&#039; service. The judgment highlighted errors in tax liability computation and penalty assessment, remanding the matter for a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority.</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>The judgment set aside the order demanding tax for various services, including &#039;commercial and industrial construction service,&#039; &#039;management, maintenance or repair service,&#039; and &#039;transport of goods by road service.&#039; The demand for &#039;site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolition service&#039; was partially confirmed. The appellant&#039;s appeal focused on this service, while the Revenue&#039;s appeal centered on the dropping of demand for &#039;transport of goods by road&#039; service. The judgment highlighted errors in tax liability computation and penalty assessment, remanding the matter for a fresh decision by the adjudicating authority.</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>