<?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 1230 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793849</link>
    <description>A composite contract involving bringing empty containers, loading packed goods, arranging container movement, coordinating with freight agencies, monitoring dispatches and ensuring delivery was classified by its essential character, with transportation treated as incidental to the principal handling activity. The service was therefore treated as cargo handling service rather than mere transportation of goods under the Finance Act, 1994. Non-payment of tax on the full taxable value, including excluded components forming part of the gross value, justified invocation of the extended period and penalties. The demand, extended limitation and penalties were sustained, and the appeals failed in full.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 25 Jun 2026 08:27:31 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=908614" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (6) TMI 1230 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793849</link>
      <description>A composite contract involving bringing empty containers, loading packed goods, arranging container movement, coordinating with freight agencies, monitoring dispatches and ensuring delivery was classified by its essential character, with transportation treated as incidental to the principal handling activity. The service was therefore treated as cargo handling service rather than mere transportation of goods under the Finance Act, 1994. Non-payment of tax on the full taxable value, including excluded components forming part of the gross value, justified invocation of the extended period and penalties. The demand, extended limitation and penalties were sustained, and the appeals failed in full.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=793849</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>