<?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 (5) TMI 60 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790858</link>
    <description>Where a contract leaves supervision, disciplinary control, wage liability, statutory compliance and employment responsibility with the contractor, the arrangement is treated as a contract for service rather than manpower supply. Applying the control, organisation and multifactor tests, the activity was classified as business auxiliary service, not manpower supply service. Because the work involved processing unmanufactured tobacco, it fell within agricultural produce, so the service met the exemption conditions under the pre-negative list notification and the corresponding post-negative list treatment for services in relation to agriculture. The refund claim was therefore accepted and rejection of refund was not sustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 02 May 2026 07:40:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899600" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 60 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790858</link>
      <description>Where a contract leaves supervision, disciplinary control, wage liability, statutory compliance and employment responsibility with the contractor, the arrangement is treated as a contract for service rather than manpower supply. Applying the control, organisation and multifactor tests, the activity was classified as business auxiliary service, not manpower supply service. Because the work involved processing unmanufactured tobacco, it fell within agricultural produce, so the service met the exemption conditions under the pre-negative list notification and the corresponding post-negative list treatment for services in relation to agriculture. The refund claim was therefore accepted and rejection of refund was not sustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 28 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790858</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>