https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751294 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that pole erection services involving digging pits, preparing concrete bases, and installing poles constituted works contracts under section 65B(54) of the Finance Act. Though the appellant did not supply poles, the requirement to provide materials like cement and concrete for base construction qualified the service as a works contract. The tribunal found the original order incorrectly classified these as pure services rather than works contracts, making them eligible for exemption under N/N. 25/2012. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalties was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. en-us Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 13 Apr 2024 09:17:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751294 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that pole erection services involving digging pits, preparing concrete bases, and installing poles constituted works contracts under section 65B(54) of the Finance Act. Though the appellant did not supply poles, the requirement to provide materials like cement and concrete for base construction qualified the service as a works contract. The tribunal found the original order incorrectly classified these as pure services rather than works contracts, making them eligible for exemption under N/N. 25/2012. The demand for service tax, interest, and penalties was set aside, and the appeal was allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 12 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751294