https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775196 CESTAT Chandigarh held that appellant's construction of MIG flats for Patiala Improvement Trust constituted taxable residential complex services under Section 65(91)(a) of Finance Act. The layout approval by Patiala Improvement Trust satisfied Condition (iv) requirements despite being self-approval. The tribunal ruled that abatement under Notification 01/2006 should be calculated first, followed by small-scale exemption deduction. Extended limitation period was rejected due to conflicting judicial opinions on residential complex taxability during the relevant period, particularly given services were provided to a statutory body. Penalties were set aside for same reasons. Appeals were partly allowed with remand to Original Authority for proper computation of service tax liability after applying abatement and exemptions in correct sequence. en-us Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 22 Jul 2025 08:25:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775196 CESTAT Chandigarh held that appellant's construction of MIG flats for Patiala Improvement Trust constituted taxable residential complex services under Section 65(91)(a) of Finance Act. The layout approval by Patiala Improvement Trust satisfied Condition (iv) requirements despite being self-approval. The tribunal ruled that abatement under Notification 01/2006 should be calculated first, followed by small-scale exemption deduction. Extended limitation period was rejected due to conflicting judicial opinions on residential complex taxability during the relevant period, particularly given services were provided to a statutory body. Penalties were set aside for same reasons. Appeals were partly allowed with remand to Original Authority for proper computation of service tax liability after applying abatement and exemptions in correct sequence. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 18 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775196