<?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>2022 (9) TMI 1158 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428213</link>
    <description>Composite construction activity involving both materials and services was held taxable, after 01.06.2007, only as works contract service and not under commercial or industrial construction service or construction of complex service; the demand confirmed under those heads was therefore set aside. The consulting engineer service component was required to be computed on amounts actually received, not gross billing, and was remitted for fresh quantification. Where possession and effective control of goods had passed to the recipient, the supply of tangible goods demand was unsustainable because the transaction had the character of a deemed sale, and that demand was also set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 26 Sep 2022 10:44:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=691845" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (9) TMI 1158 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428213</link>
      <description>Composite construction activity involving both materials and services was held taxable, after 01.06.2007, only as works contract service and not under commercial or industrial construction service or construction of complex service; the demand confirmed under those heads was therefore set aside. The consulting engineer service component was required to be computed on amounts actually received, not gross billing, and was remitted for fresh quantification. Where possession and effective control of goods had passed to the recipient, the supply of tangible goods demand was unsustainable because the transaction had the character of a deemed sale, and that demand was also set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428213</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>