https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769992 CESTAT NEW DELHI-AT allowed the appeal regarding service tax calculation under Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The tribunal held that for works contracts, Rule 2A(i) applies when goods value is determinable/separately quantified, while Rule 2A(ii) applies when consumable goods value cannot be separately determined. In this case involving motor vehicle services, spare parts were separately invoiced (Rule 2A(i) applicable), but paint job costs were indivisible from labor charges, making goods value non-determinable (Rule 2A(ii) applicable). The tribunal found no error in appellant's tax calculation for painting services and ruled the demand was wrongly confirmed, allowing bifurcation of composite contracts per constitutional provisions. en-us Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 05 May 2025 08:37:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769992 CESTAT NEW DELHI-AT allowed the appeal regarding service tax calculation under Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006. The tribunal held that for works contracts, Rule 2A(i) applies when goods value is determinable/separately quantified, while Rule 2A(ii) applies when consumable goods value cannot be separately determined. In this case involving motor vehicle services, spare parts were separately invoiced (Rule 2A(i) applicable), but paint job costs were indivisible from labor charges, making goods value non-determinable (Rule 2A(ii) applicable). The tribunal found no error in appellant's tax calculation for painting services and ruled the demand was wrongly confirmed, allowing bifurcation of composite contracts per constitutional provisions. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 02 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=769992