<?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 1822 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771550</link>
    <description>Service tax could not be imposed on the margin between the purchase price and resale price of goods where the supplies were separately treated as sale of goods, VAT was discharged, and the records showed distinct sale transactions supported by documentary evidence. The Tribunal held that the value of goods already sold could not be recharacterised as taxable service merely because incidental costs and profit were loaded into the sale price. It also found that extended limitation was unavailable because the assessee was registered, filed returns, disclosed the transactions in its books, and there was no material of suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade tax.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 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=824902" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (5) TMI 1822 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771550</link>
      <description>Service tax could not be imposed on the margin between the purchase price and resale price of goods where the supplies were separately treated as sale of goods, VAT was discharged, and the records showed distinct sale transactions supported by documentary evidence. The Tribunal held that the value of goods already sold could not be recharacterised as taxable service merely because incidental costs and profit were loaded into the sale price. It also found that extended limitation was unavailable because the assessee was registered, filed returns, disclosed the transactions in its books, and there was no material of suppression, wilful misstatement, or intent to evade tax.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 09 Apr 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=771550</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>