<?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 (3) TMI 1231 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750734</link>
    <description>CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal regarding service tax levy on Business Support Service for a joint venture arrangement. The appellant entered into a MOU with another company for setting up a 20 MW CDM co-generation plant on BOOT basis. The department levied service tax on Rs. 50 lakh deposit received. CESTAT held that Business Support Service involves outsourced work with deployment of services and personnel, which was absent here. The relationship was principal-to-principal basis constituting a joint venture, not service provider-client arrangement. The deposit was not consideration for any service provision. The impugned order was set aside as legally unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 29 Mar 2024 07:45:38 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=748481" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (3) TMI 1231 - CESTAT CHANDIGARH</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750734</link>
      <description>CESTAT Chandigarh allowed the appeal regarding service tax levy on Business Support Service for a joint venture arrangement. The appellant entered into a MOU with another company for setting up a 20 MW CDM co-generation plant on BOOT basis. The department levied service tax on Rs. 50 lakh deposit received. CESTAT held that Business Support Service involves outsourced work with deployment of services and personnel, which was absent here. The relationship was principal-to-principal basis constituting a joint venture, not service provider-client arrangement. The deposit was not consideration for any service provision. The impugned order was set aside as legally unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Mar 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750734</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>