<?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 (4) TMI 1126 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751945</link>
    <description>CESTAT Chennai held that laying of optic fibre cables for BSNL is exempt from service tax levy. The Tribunal relied on Board&#039;s Circular No.123/5/2010 which exempts laying of cables under/alongside roads from service tax, interpreting &quot;cable&quot; in general sense to include telecommunications cables. Following precedent from CESTAT Allahabad in CCE Lucknow v. Raj Electric Works, the Tribunal found no service tax liability exists. Additionally, the demand was time-barred as no suppression of facts occurred - the appellant maintained proper records and the issue was interpretational. The appeal was allowed and impugned order set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 30 Apr 2024 21:58:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=751491" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (4) TMI 1126 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751945</link>
      <description>CESTAT Chennai held that laying of optic fibre cables for BSNL is exempt from service tax levy. The Tribunal relied on Board&#039;s Circular No.123/5/2010 which exempts laying of cables under/alongside roads from service tax, interpreting &quot;cable&quot; in general sense to include telecommunications cables. Following precedent from CESTAT Allahabad in CCE Lucknow v. Raj Electric Works, the Tribunal found no service tax liability exists. Additionally, the demand was time-barred as no suppression of facts occurred - the appellant maintained proper records and the issue was interpretational. The appeal was allowed and impugned order set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 25 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751945</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>