<?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 (1) TMI 1637 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469257</link>
    <description>Composite works contracts involving transfer of property in goods and labour could not be taxed as mere service contracts where deemed sale of materials and VAT payment were not disputed. Applying Larsen &amp; Toubro, the Tribunal held that before 01.06.2007 the Finance Act, 1994 did not contain the charge or machinery to levy service tax on indivisible composite works contracts. The department&#039;s attempt to classify the activity as completion and finishing service under commercial or industrial construction service to deny abatement therefore failed, and the service tax demand was held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 19:59:49 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906563" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (1) TMI 1637 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469257</link>
      <description>Composite works contracts involving transfer of property in goods and labour could not be taxed as mere service contracts where deemed sale of materials and VAT payment were not disputed. Applying Larsen &amp; Toubro, the Tribunal held that before 01.06.2007 the Finance Act, 1994 did not contain the charge or machinery to levy service tax on indivisible composite works contracts. The department&#039;s attempt to classify the activity as completion and finishing service under commercial or industrial construction service to deny abatement therefore failed, and the service tax demand was held unsustainable. The impugned order was set aside in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469257</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>