<?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>2024 (8) TMI 1724 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468468</link>
    <description>Construction of buildings for educational institutions used solely for education and not for profit is treated as non-commercial and falls outside taxable works contract service, with the departmental circular on this point operating against taxability. The extended period of limitation is not justified where the issue is interpretational and the department already had the relevant records, without positive suppression or intent to evade. On capital goods credit, removal of the requirement that goods be received in the registered premises did not save the disputed credit for the relevant period, so the credit demand and interest were sustained. Penalty was not sustainable in the circumstances and was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 07 May 2026 12:29:02 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=900476" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (8) TMI 1724 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468468</link>
      <description>Construction of buildings for educational institutions used solely for education and not for profit is treated as non-commercial and falls outside taxable works contract service, with the departmental circular on this point operating against taxability. The extended period of limitation is not justified where the issue is interpretational and the department already had the relevant records, without positive suppression or intent to evade. On capital goods credit, removal of the requirement that goods be received in the registered premises did not save the disputed credit for the relevant period, so the credit demand and interest were sustained. Penalty was not sustainable in the circumstances and was set aside.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 22 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=468468</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>