Embezzlement losses in charitable institutions remain allowable when misappropriation is established, irrecoverable, and not a specified-person benefi...
National long-distance undertaking status supports deduction where separately licensed infrastructure, resources, revenue, and expenditure establish c...
Agency reimbursement income follows contractual deposit-liability computation, while pending deposit collections do not constitute deemed-dividend loa...
Membership-consent thresholds for oppression petitions are satisfied by unchallenged voter-list consents, while unsupported forgery claims require pro...
The appellant provided two services - servicing of motor vehicles and running an amusement park. The amusement park service was exempt from service tax until 1.6.2015. After that, it became taxable but the appellant did not pay service tax, claiming it was covered under the negative list or exemption. However, the tribunal held that the amusement park service was not covered under the negative list or exemption after 1.6.2015 and hence taxable. Regarding the time limitation, the tribunal held that since the appellant had a bona fide belief of non-taxability and the revenue did not scrutinize the returns, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. The demand for short payment of service tax under repairs and maintenance services was also time-barred. The tribunal set aside the confirmed demand of Rs. 72,94,797/- towards reversal of CENVAT credit on merits, relying on court rulings that revenue cannot demand reversal without asking for proportionate reversal. The total confirmed demand of Rs. 1,73,60,105/- was set aside due to limitation. The appeal was allowed.
The appellant provided two services - servicing of motor vehicles and running an amusement park. The amusement park service was exempt from service tax until 1.6.2015. After that, it became taxable but the appellant did not pay service tax, claiming it was covered under the negative list or exemption. However, the tribunal held that the amusement park service was not covered under the negative list or exemption after 1.6.2015 and hence taxable. Regarding the time limitation, the tribunal held that since the appellant had a bona fide belief of non-taxability and the revenue did not scrutinize the returns, the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked. The demand for short payment of service tax under repairs and maintenance services was also time-barred. The tribunal set aside the confirmed demand of Rs. 72,94,797/- towards reversal of CENVAT credit on merits, relying on court rulings that revenue cannot demand reversal without asking for proportionate reversal. The total confirmed demand of Rs. 1,73,60,105/- was set aside due to limitation. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4881 
