<?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>2025 (5) TMI 1829 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771557</link>
    <description>Construction of single houses under a welfare housing scheme for economically weaker sections was treated as outside taxable construction service because the project did not constitute a residential complex with more than twelve units, common areas and specified facilities, and the personal use exclusion was applied; the composite-contract argument was immaterial. Construction and repair work for educational and charitable institutions was also treated as non-taxable because such premises were not shown to be used primarily for commerce or industry, and the Board circular excluded constructions for educational, religious, charitable, health, sanitation or philanthropic purposes not meant for profit. The pre-negative-list construction-service charges were therefore inapplicable on both sets of transactions.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 28 May 2025 08:26:34 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=824895" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1829 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771557</link>
      <description>Construction of single houses under a welfare housing scheme for economically weaker sections was treated as outside taxable construction service because the project did not constitute a residential complex with more than twelve units, common areas and specified facilities, and the personal use exclusion was applied; the composite-contract argument was immaterial. Construction and repair work for educational and charitable institutions was also treated as non-taxable because such premises were not shown to be used primarily for commerce or industry, and the Board circular excluded constructions for educational, religious, charitable, health, sanitation or philanthropic purposes not meant for profit. The pre-negative-list construction-service charges were therefore inapplicable on both sets of transactions.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771557</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>