https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449980 CESTAT Hyderabad set aside service tax demand on pipeline laying for irrigation projects under erection, commissioning and installation services. The tribunal held that under composite contracts where property in goods transfers to employer through accretion/incorporation into works, the contractor cannot be considered to have provided taxable works contract service under Section 65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act, 1994. Following Larger Bench precedent in Lanco Infratech case, the entire demand was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 23 Feb 2024 20:15:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449980 CESTAT Hyderabad set aside service tax demand on pipeline laying for irrigation projects under erection, commissioning and installation services. The tribunal held that under composite contracts where property in goods transfers to employer through accretion/incorporation into works, the contractor cannot be considered to have provided taxable works contract service under Section 65(105)(zzzza) of Finance Act, 1994. Following Larger Bench precedent in Lanco Infratech case, the entire demand was deemed unsustainable. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449980