<?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>Tribunal Rules Service Tax Demand Invalid Due to Deficient Show Cause Notice and Misinterpretation of Taxability Clause.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75397</link>
    <description>Validity of SCN - SCN suffers from incurable deficiency - Demand raised solely on the basis of Income Tax data shared by the Income Tax authorities - CESTAT found that the orders confirming the service tax demand were beyond the scope of the SCN and did not specify the clause under which the service fell for taxability. - The tribunal interpreted Section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994, and determined that the appellant&#039;s activities did not constitute the construction of a residential complex liable for service tax. - The tribunal set aside the service tax demand upheld by the impugned orders, ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2024 13:00:16 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2024 13:00:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=745789" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Tribunal Rules Service Tax Demand Invalid Due to Deficient Show Cause Notice and Misinterpretation of Taxability Clause.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75397</link>
      <description>Validity of SCN - SCN suffers from incurable deficiency - Demand raised solely on the basis of Income Tax data shared by the Income Tax authorities - CESTAT found that the orders confirming the service tax demand were beyond the scope of the SCN and did not specify the clause under which the service fell for taxability. - The tribunal interpreted Section 65(91a) of the Finance Act, 1994, and determined that the appellant&#039;s activities did not constitute the construction of a residential complex liable for service tax. - The tribunal set aside the service tax demand upheld by the impugned orders, ruling in favor of the appellant.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 05 Mar 2024 13:00:16 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=75397</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>