<?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 580 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791378</link>
    <description>Receipts shown by supply orders and State VAT records to relate to supply of stone ballast and stone dust were treated as transactions in goods, placing them outside the service tax levy. The remaining receipts were regarded as exempt road-construction receipts, so only the supply-of-material component was in dispute. On that basis, the demand of service tax on the four supply-of-material transactions was set aside, and the related interest and penalty failed to the same extent.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 09:50:53 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=900936" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 580 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791378</link>
      <description>Receipts shown by supply orders and State VAT records to relate to supply of stone ballast and stone dust were treated as transactions in goods, placing them outside the service tax levy. The remaining receipts were regarded as exempt road-construction receipts, so only the supply-of-material component was in dispute. On that basis, the demand of service tax on the four supply-of-material transactions was set aside, and the related interest and penalty failed to the same extent.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 10 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791378</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>