https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774084 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal in part in a service tax case involving construction work. The appellant contractor performed various construction and repair works for PWD Department including godowns, tourist facilities, court buildings, and strong rooms. The tribunal held that these works qualified as "original work" under Rule 2(A) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, directing re-quantification of service tax demand at 40% of value with cum-tax benefit. The penalty under Section 78 was set aside as the work was for government with no suppression of facts or willful misstatement to evade service tax. en-us Wed, 02 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 03 Jul 2025 08:34:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774084 CESTAT Allahabad allowed the appeal in part in a service tax case involving construction work. The appellant contractor performed various construction and repair works for PWD Department including godowns, tourist facilities, court buildings, and strong rooms. The tribunal held that these works qualified as "original work" under Rule 2(A) of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, directing re-quantification of service tax demand at 40% of value with cum-tax benefit. The penalty under Section 78 was set aside as the work was for government with no suppression of facts or willful misstatement to evade service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 02 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774084