<?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>Centralised registration and work-order substance defeated service tax demand on jurisdiction and manpower supply classification.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100421</link>
    <description>Centralised service tax registration fixes jurisdiction for issuing and deciding demand proceedings, and proceedings initiated by a different Commissionerate were held unsustainable where the taxpayer&#039;s centralised registration with Kolkata was undisputed. The Tribunal also held that the contract was for execution of specified loading and unloading work, not manpower supply, because payment was linked to output, the contractor retained supervision and control, and liability for improper handling remained with the contractor. On that basis, no reverse charge service tax liability arose. The demand failed both on jurisdiction and on merits, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:40 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=905303" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Centralised registration and work-order substance defeated service tax demand on jurisdiction and manpower supply classification.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100421</link>
      <description>Centralised service tax registration fixes jurisdiction for issuing and deciding demand proceedings, and proceedings initiated by a different Commissionerate were held unsustainable where the taxpayer&#039;s centralised registration with Kolkata was undisputed. The Tribunal also held that the contract was for execution of specified loading and unloading work, not manpower supply, because payment was linked to output, the contractor retained supervision and control, and liability for improper handling remained with the contractor. On that basis, no reverse charge service tax liability arose. The demand failed both on jurisdiction and on merits, and the impugned order was set aside.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 04 Jun 2026 08:37:37 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=100421</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>