https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763827 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding classification of construction services. The tribunal held that agreements between developer and buyers for residential units constitute works contracts, not construction of complex services. Citing precedents, the tribunal ruled such contracts were not taxable prior to 1-7-2010 amendment. Even if classified as construction of complex services, composite contracts without land value deduction mechanism remain non-taxable per Delhi HC ruling. The service tax demand was barred by limitation as the issue involved pure legal interpretation. Extended limitation period was inapplicable. Penalty under Section 78A on partnership firm's partner was unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside. en-us Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 30 Dec 2024 08:39:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763827 CESTAT Ahmedabad allowed the appeal regarding classification of construction services. The tribunal held that agreements between developer and buyers for residential units constitute works contracts, not construction of complex services. Citing precedents, the tribunal ruled such contracts were not taxable prior to 1-7-2010 amendment. Even if classified as construction of complex services, composite contracts without land value deduction mechanism remain non-taxable per Delhi HC ruling. The service tax demand was barred by limitation as the issue involved pure legal interpretation. Extended limitation period was inapplicable. Penalty under Section 78A on partnership firm's partner was unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763827