<?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>2008 (10) TMI 176 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33773</link>
    <description>The Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalties in a case concerning the construction of a ground water reservoir and raising the height of an existing reservoir. The Tribunal found merit in the applicant&#039;s argument that the construction of a water body like a reservoir falls under the exclusion provided in Section 65(97a) of the Finance Act, exempting it from service tax. Despite the revenue&#039;s contention that the construction activities constituted civil construction subject to service tax, the Tribunal focused on the nature of the main construction activity involving the reservoirs and allowed the stay petition to proceed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 10 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=72402" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2008 (10) TMI 176 - CESTAT, NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33773</link>
      <description>The Tribunal granted the waiver of pre-deposit of service tax and penalties in a case concerning the construction of a ground water reservoir and raising the height of an existing reservoir. The Tribunal found merit in the applicant&#039;s argument that the construction of a water body like a reservoir falls under the exclusion provided in Section 65(97a) of the Finance Act, exempting it from service tax. Despite the revenue&#039;s contention that the construction activities constituted civil construction subject to service tax, the Tribunal focused on the nature of the main construction activity involving the reservoirs and allowed the stay petition to proceed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 08 Oct 2008 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=33773</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>