Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
The CESTAT held that the sale of food items through "Take Away" or "Home Delivery" does not involve any service element, and is clearly an activity of sale of food. Following the ratio of previous judgments, such activity is not liable to service tax. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, ruling that service tax cannot be levied on the sale of food over the counter or through takeaway/home delivery channels.
The CESTAT held that the sale of food items through "Take Away" or "Home Delivery" does not involve any service element, and is clearly an activity of sale of food. Following the ratio of previous judgments, such activity is not liable to service tax. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, ruling that service tax cannot be levied on the sale of food over the counter or through takeaway/home delivery channels.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
