<?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 (4) TMI 3 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788934</link>
    <description>Reimbursed wages separately identified in the work order and confirmed by the service recipient were not includible in the taxable value, because only the gross amount charged for the service could be taxed and reimbursements could not be added. Diesel supplied under a separate contract with independently identified rates and quantities was likewise excluded from Service Tax as a separately identifiable goods component. Supply and unloading of soil did not amount to Site Formation and Clearance services, as the activity lacked site-preparation functions such as excavation or levelling. A demand based only on mismatch between ST-3 returns and the balance sheet failed, and the extended period of limitation was unavailable for want of suppression or intent to evade.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Apr 2026 07:51:03 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894328" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 3 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788934</link>
      <description>Reimbursed wages separately identified in the work order and confirmed by the service recipient were not includible in the taxable value, because only the gross amount charged for the service could be taxed and reimbursements could not be added. Diesel supplied under a separate contract with independently identified rates and quantities was likewise excluded from Service Tax as a separately identifiable goods component. Supply and unloading of soil did not amount to Site Formation and Clearance services, as the activity lacked site-preparation functions such as excavation or levelling. A demand based only on mismatch between ST-3 returns and the balance sheet failed, and the extended period of limitation was unavailable for want of suppression or intent to evade.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788934</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>