<?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 (6) TMI 643 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793262</link>
    <description>Removal of settled ash from an ash pond was treated as part of the production process and not taxable under site formation, excavation or demolition services, so the demand and interest on that head were set aside. Tax paid under works contract service, together with appropriation of deposits made during investigation, fully covered the confirmed liability, leaving no further recoverable demand. The claim that manpower supply liability was confined to 25% under partial reverse charge was rejected for want of proof of the notification conditions, but challan-wise payments and adjustment again extinguished the balance demand. The reverse charge demand on manpower supply was also held unsustainable on revenue-neutrality and limitation grounds. Penalty under Section 78 was deleted, while penalty under Section 77 was sustained.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 15:15:06 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=906651" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 643 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793262</link>
      <description>Removal of settled ash from an ash pond was treated as part of the production process and not taxable under site formation, excavation or demolition services, so the demand and interest on that head were set aside. Tax paid under works contract service, together with appropriation of deposits made during investigation, fully covered the confirmed liability, leaving no further recoverable demand. The claim that manpower supply liability was confined to 25% under partial reverse charge was rejected for want of proof of the notification conditions, but challan-wise payments and adjustment again extinguished the balance demand. The reverse charge demand on manpower supply was also held unsustainable on revenue-neutrality and limitation grounds. Penalty under Section 78 was deleted, while penalty under Section 77 was sustained.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793262</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>