https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772338 CESTAT Chennai-AT allowed appellant's appeal regarding valuation of taxable service under Works Contract Service for service tax liability. The tribunal held that appellant's method of segregating invoice value into VAT on goods and service tax on service portion complied with Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, particularly Rule 2A. Following binding SC precedent in Safety Retreading Co. v Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem and earlier CESTAT ruling in appellant's own case, the tribunal concluded appellant correctly discharged service tax on service portion. The impugned order was set aside. en-us Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 07 Jun 2025 08:32:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772338 CESTAT Chennai-AT allowed appellant's appeal regarding valuation of taxable service under Works Contract Service for service tax liability. The tribunal held that appellant's method of segregating invoice value into VAT on goods and service tax on service portion complied with Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, particularly Rule 2A. Following binding SC precedent in Safety Retreading Co. v Commissioner of Central Excise, Salem and earlier CESTAT ruling in appellant's own case, the tribunal concluded appellant correctly discharged service tax on service portion. The impugned order was set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=772338