<?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 (12) TMI 599 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431482</link>
    <description>The Tribunal held that the levy of service tax on composite works contracts before June 01, 2007, under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service was not sustainable. For the period after June 01, 2007, it was determined that demands could not be confirmed under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service as it would be taxable only under &#039;works contract&#039;. The Tribunal also clarified that the work undertaken by the appellant did not fall under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service as the buildings constructed had fewer than twelve residential units. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 15 Dec 2022 09:29:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=698624" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2022 (12) TMI 599 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431482</link>
      <description>The Tribunal held that the levy of service tax on composite works contracts before June 01, 2007, under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service was not sustainable. For the period after June 01, 2007, it was determined that demands could not be confirmed under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service as it would be taxable only under &#039;works contract&#039;. The Tribunal also clarified that the work undertaken by the appellant did not fall under &#039;construction of complex&#039; service as the buildings constructed had fewer than twelve residential units. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 23 Nov 2022 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=431482</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>