<?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 (8) TMI 1762 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297718</link>
    <description>Survey and map making activity undertaken for Government projects relating to roads, railways and dams was treated as incidental to a composite works contract, not as a separately taxable service. Because the work formed part of infrastructure-related works contract activity and could not be artificially split into a distinct service heading, the assessee&#039;s classification was upheld. The extended limitation period was also unavailable since the assessee maintained regular records and filed returns, with no suppression of facts, collusion or wilful misconduct shown. The tax demand for the extended period was therefore barred by limitation.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sun, 19 Sep 2021 22:12:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=656191" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2019 (8) TMI 1762 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297718</link>
      <description>Survey and map making activity undertaken for Government projects relating to roads, railways and dams was treated as incidental to a composite works contract, not as a separately taxable service. Because the work formed part of infrastructure-related works contract activity and could not be artificially split into a distinct service heading, the assessee&#039;s classification was upheld. The extended limitation period was also unavailable since the assessee maintained regular records and filed returns, with no suppression of facts, collusion or wilful misconduct shown. The tax demand for the extended period was therefore barred by limitation.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 09 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=297718</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>