<?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>2026 (1) TMI 1523 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785767</link>
    <description>Mixed dermatological and trichological procedures must be examined item-wise to determine whether each service is healthcare service or taxable cosmetic or plastic surgery; the existing classification could not stand and fresh adjudication was required. Quantification could not rest on the kacha register alone because it was only a tentative record, although best judgment assessment was permissible where relevant software data was not produced. Demand confirmed beyond the specific amount proposed in the show cause notice was unsustainable. Cum-tax adjustment was admissible because service tax had not been separately collected. Extended limitation was not available, as the dispute was one of classification and the filed returns and audited accounts were already on record.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2026 08:55:14 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=882575" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 1523 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785767</link>
      <description>Mixed dermatological and trichological procedures must be examined item-wise to determine whether each service is healthcare service or taxable cosmetic or plastic surgery; the existing classification could not stand and fresh adjudication was required. Quantification could not rest on the kacha register alone because it was only a tentative record, although best judgment assessment was permissible where relevant software data was not produced. Demand confirmed beyond the specific amount proposed in the show cause notice was unsustainable. Cum-tax adjustment was admissible because service tax had not been separately collected. Extended limitation was not available, as the dispute was one of classification and the filed returns and audited accounts were already on record.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 30 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=785767</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>