<?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>2023 (7) TMI 766 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440493</link>
    <description>The dominant issue was whether evacuation and removal of fly ash from silos and hydro bins at thermal power stations constituted a taxable &quot;cleaning service&quot; under s.65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held the contracted activity did not fall within the statutory definition because no specified cleaning operations were undertaken; fly ash was removed to facilitate uninterrupted industrial operations and was an integral part of the production process rather than an activity aimed at cleaning or decontamination. Relying on prior CESTAT precedent treating similar fly ash excavation/transport as outside &quot;cleaning service&quot;, the demand under that category was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 09 Jan 2026 14:43:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=720024" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 766 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440493</link>
      <description>The dominant issue was whether evacuation and removal of fly ash from silos and hydro bins at thermal power stations constituted a taxable &quot;cleaning service&quot; under s.65(24b) of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held the contracted activity did not fall within the statutory definition because no specified cleaning operations were undertaken; fly ash was removed to facilitate uninterrupted industrial operations and was an integral part of the production process rather than an activity aimed at cleaning or decontamination. Relying on prior CESTAT precedent treating similar fly ash excavation/transport as outside &quot;cleaning service&quot;, the demand under that category was unsustainable and the appeal was allowed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 02 Jun 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440493</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>