<?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>2024 (2) TMI 1308 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450157</link>
    <description>Works contract services rendered to State-created and State-controlled bodies engaged in education, health, housing and allied public functions were treated as exempt under the amended definition of &quot;governmental authority&quot; in Notification No. 25/2012-ST, read with Notification No. 02/2014-ST. Subcontracted works contract services for exempt main contracts were also covered by the subcontract exemption. For construction-related services in an SEZ, the Special Economic Zones law was treated as having overriding effect, so procedural non-production of prescribed forms did not defeat substantive exemption. On that basis, the tax and penalty demands were set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 29 Feb 2024 07:54:39 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745166" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (2) TMI 1308 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450157</link>
      <description>Works contract services rendered to State-created and State-controlled bodies engaged in education, health, housing and allied public functions were treated as exempt under the amended definition of &quot;governmental authority&quot; in Notification No. 25/2012-ST, read with Notification No. 02/2014-ST. Subcontracted works contract services for exempt main contracts were also covered by the subcontract exemption. For construction-related services in an SEZ, the Special Economic Zones law was treated as having overriding effect, so procedural non-production of prescribed forms did not defeat substantive exemption. On that basis, the tax and penalty demands were set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 28 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=450157</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>