<?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 1165 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791963</link>
    <description>Electricity charges separately billed on actual consumption were treated as a sale of goods, so they fell outside the taxable value of Management, Maintenance or Repair Service. Transformer installation recoveries were likewise excluded because the amounts were less than actual cost and were merely reimbursed as conduit expenses connected with electricity supply. On that reasoning, service tax on both components was unsustainable, and the connected penalty could not survive.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 21 May 2026 08:30:17 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=903086" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 1165 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791963</link>
      <description>Electricity charges separately billed on actual consumption were treated as a sale of goods, so they fell outside the taxable value of Management, Maintenance or Repair Service. Transformer installation recoveries were likewise excluded because the amounts were less than actual cost and were merely reimbursed as conduit expenses connected with electricity supply. On that reasoning, service tax on both components was unsustainable, and the connected penalty could not survive.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 18 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791963</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>