Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
The definition of residential complex excludes from service tax levy, a complex constructed by directly engaging a person for design and planning, where the construction is intended for personal use as residence. Relying on Khurana Engineering, where services provided to the Government for residential complex were treated as for 'personal use', the Tribunal held that the construction services provided by the respondents to GSPHCL, SMC, and SUDA, being Government bodies, were for non-commercial purpose and outside service tax purview. The services were treated as provided to the Government, and the end-use of the residential complex by the Government was covered under the definition of 'personal use' in the residential complex service, hence not leviable to service tax. The department's appeals were dismissed as lacking merit.
The definition of residential complex excludes from service tax levy, a complex constructed by directly engaging a person for design and planning, where the construction is intended for personal use as residence. Relying on Khurana Engineering, where services provided to the Government for residential complex were treated as for 'personal use', the Tribunal held that the construction services provided by the respondents to GSPHCL, SMC, and SUDA, being Government bodies, were for non-commercial purpose and outside service tax purview. The services were treated as provided to the Government, and the end-use of the residential complex by the Government was covered under the definition of 'personal use' in the residential complex service, hence not leviable to service tax. The department's appeals were dismissed as lacking merit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
