https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469657 The commentary examines whether service tax can be demanded from a sub-contractor when the main contractor has already discharged tax on the composite contract value. One view treats a second levy as impermissible multiple taxation in a destination-based service tax regime, so the demand, extended period, and penalties fail, while abatement for material, cum-tax benefit, and SEZ exemption are allowed. The contrary view says the person actually providing the taxable service remains liable under the Finance Act unless exempt, and rejects revenue neutrality as a complete defence, while accepting the SEZ claim but not similar relief on limitation and penalties. en-us Fri, 10 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jun 2026 18:40:38 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469657 The commentary examines whether service tax can be demanded from a sub-contractor when the main contractor has already discharged tax on the composite contract value. One view treats a second levy as impermissible multiple taxation in a destination-based service tax regime, so the demand, extended period, and penalties fail, while abatement for material, cum-tax benefit, and SEZ exemption are allowed. The contrary view says the person actually providing the taxable service remains liable under the Finance Act unless exempt, and rejects revenue neutrality as a complete defence, while accepting the SEZ claim but not similar relief on limitation and penalties. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 10 Nov 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469657