Ask Jurishour AI

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors
tdb_templates
saswp_reviews
saswp-collections
saswp_rvs_location
tdc-review-email
web-story-font
web-story
googlesitekit_email
tds_locker
tds_email
saswp
mailpoet_page
mailpoet_email
tdcpt_tunes
tdc-review
pronamic_payment
pronamic_gateway
pronamic_pay_subscr
wpcode
HomeIndirect TaxesServices Rendered During Warranty Period Qualify As ‘Works Contract Services’, Subject To...

Services Rendered During Warranty Period Qualify As ‘Works Contract Services’, Subject To Partial Tax Liability Under RCM: CESTAT

Indirect Taxes

Published on

By Mariya Paliwala
cestat

🚀 Stay Connected With JurisHour

WhatsApp X Telegram

The Customs, Excise & Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (CESTAT), Delhi Bench, has set aside a service tax demand holding that services rendered during the warranty period for LG Electronics qualify as “works contract services” and are subject to partial tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism (RCM).  The bench of Dr. Rachna Gupta (Judicial Member)…

Membership Required

You must be a member to access this content.

View Membership Levels

Already a member? Log in here
Mariya Paliwala
Mariya Paliwalahttps://www.jurishour.in/
Mariya is the Senior Editor at Juris Hour. She has 7+ years of experience on covering tax litigation stories from the Supreme Court, High Courts and various tribunals including CESTAT, ITAT, NCLAT, NCLT, etc. Mariya graduated from MLSU Law College, Udaipur (Raj.) with B.A.LL.B. and also holds an LL.M. She started her career as a freelance tax reporter in the leading online legal news companies.

Latest articles

GST

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied Merely Because Goods Left India After Refund Period: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Chandigarh Bench has upheld an exporter’s...
GST

Appellate Order Can’t Simply Confirm Tax Demand Without Examining Taxpayer’s Objections, Giving Reasons: GSTAT

The Raipur Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has sent...
GST

Cash Refund Of Accumulated ITC Can Be Recovered As Erroneous Refund U/s 73 Of GST Act: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), has held that a cash refund...
Direct Tax

Can Income Tax Dept. Retain Seized Cash Beyond 120 Days? Gujarat High Court Refers Rs. 5.68 Crore Dispute to Larger Bench

The Gujarat High Court has referred three questions concerning the release of cash seized...

More like this

GST

GST Refund Can’t Be Denied Merely Because Goods Left India After Refund Period: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), Chandigarh Bench has upheld an exporter’s...
GST

Appellate Order Can’t Simply Confirm Tax Demand Without Examining Taxpayer’s Objections, Giving Reasons: GSTAT

The Raipur Bench of the Goods and Services Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT) has sent...
GST

Cash Refund Of Accumulated ITC Can Be Recovered As Erroneous Refund U/s 73 Of GST Act: GSTAT

The Goods and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (GSTAT), has held that a cash refund...