Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 4 of 4 (0.19 seconds)

M/S. Sobti Steel Rolling Mills & ... vs C.C.E., Ludhiana on 24 March, 2014

Sandeep Sobti Vs CCE 2008 (11) STR 115 (T)  Sima Engg. Constructions Vs CCE 2011 (21) STR 179 (T)  Kedar Construction Vs CCE 2015 (37) STR 631 (T)  GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (8) TMI 995- CESTAT  Dinesh Chandra R Agrawal Infracon Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (11) TMI 1080-CESTAT  Jija Builders Vs CCE 2018 (4) TMI 730-CESTAT  B.R. Kohli Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs CST 2017 (4) TMI 38-CESTAT From the above decision it is the settled law that show cause notice has not proposed the demand under the correct category of the service the demand shall not sustain. Following the rule of the above decision in the present case also since the demand was raised under commercial and industrial construction services whereas the correct classification of the service is work contract service, accordingly the demand in the present case is not sustainable on this ground itself.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 0 - Full Document

Sima Engg. Constructions vs Cce, Trichy on 20 September, 2010

Sandeep Sobti Vs CCE 2008 (11) STR 115 (T)  Sima Engg. Constructions Vs CCE 2011 (21) STR 179 (T)  Kedar Construction Vs CCE 2015 (37) STR 631 (T)  GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (8) TMI 995- CESTAT  Dinesh Chandra R Agrawal Infracon Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (11) TMI 1080-CESTAT  Jija Builders Vs CCE 2018 (4) TMI 730-CESTAT  B.R. Kohli Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs CST 2017 (4) TMI 38-CESTAT From the above decision it is the settled law that show cause notice has not proposed the demand under the correct category of the service the demand shall not sustain. Following the rule of the above decision in the present case also since the demand was raised under commercial and industrial construction services whereas the correct classification of the service is work contract service, accordingly the demand in the present case is not sustainable on this ground itself.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 1 - Cited by 4 - Full Document

Sai Kedar Services vs Cce Kolhapur on 12 December, 2018

Sandeep Sobti Vs CCE 2008 (11) STR 115 (T)  Sima Engg. Constructions Vs CCE 2011 (21) STR 179 (T)  Kedar Construction Vs CCE 2015 (37) STR 631 (T)  GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (8) TMI 995- CESTAT  Dinesh Chandra R Agrawal Infracon Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (11) TMI 1080-CESTAT  Jija Builders Vs CCE 2018 (4) TMI 730-CESTAT  B.R. Kohli Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs CST 2017 (4) TMI 38-CESTAT From the above decision it is the settled law that show cause notice has not proposed the demand under the correct category of the service the demand shall not sustain. Following the rule of the above decision in the present case also since the demand was raised under commercial and industrial construction services whereas the correct classification of the service is work contract service, accordingly the demand in the present case is not sustainable on this ground itself.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 2 - Cited by 2 - Full Document

Vivek Agrawal Dir M J Steel Pvt Ltd vs Commissioner (Appeals) Cgst, Central ... on 20 May, 2022

Sandeep Sobti Vs CCE 2008 (11) STR 115 (T)  Sima Engg. Constructions Vs CCE 2011 (21) STR 179 (T)  Kedar Construction Vs CCE 2015 (37) STR 631 (T)  GD Goenka Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (8) TMI 995- CESTAT  Dinesh Chandra R Agrawal Infracon Pvt. Ltd Vs CGST 2023 (11) TMI 1080-CESTAT  Jija Builders Vs CCE 2018 (4) TMI 730-CESTAT  B.R. Kohli Construction Pvt. Ltd Vs CST 2017 (4) TMI 38-CESTAT From the above decision it is the settled law that show cause notice has not proposed the demand under the correct category of the service the demand shall not sustain. Following the rule of the above decision in the present case also since the demand was raised under commercial and industrial construction services whereas the correct classification of the service is work contract service, accordingly the demand in the present case is not sustainable on this ground itself.
Custom, Excise & Service Tax Tribunal Cites 0 - Cited by 1 - Full Document
1