Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
1. The services provided by the appellant amounted to mining activities and fell within the scope of "mining services" u/s 65(105)(zzzy) of the Finance Act, 1994, introduced on 01.06.2007. 2. The activities were not preparatory work but constituted mining activities per se to win the minerals (lignite). Therefore, they cannot be classified as "Site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolition" u/s 65(97a). 3. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Doypack Systems P Ltd, the services related to mining of lignite, which is a mineral, and thus qualified as mining services. 4. The appellant is eligible for a refund of Rs. 4,60,77,978 paid as service tax before 01.06.2007, as the services were not taxable prior to that date. 5. The appellant has crossed the bar of unjust enrichment by providing evidence that the tax burden was borne by them. 6. The appellant is entitled to interest on the delayed refund payment as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, from the expiry of 3 months from the date of the original refund application. 7.
1. The services provided by the appellant amounted to mining activities and fell within the scope of "mining services" u/s 65(105)(zzzy) of the Finance Act, 1994, introduced on 01.06.2007. 2. The activities were not preparatory work but constituted mining activities per se to win the minerals (lignite). Therefore, they cannot be classified as "Site formation and clearance, excavation and earthmoving and demolition" u/s 65(97a). 3. Following the Supreme Court's decision in Doypack Systems P Ltd, the services related to mining of lignite, which is a mineral, and thus qualified as mining services. 4. The appellant is eligible for a refund of Rs. 4,60,77,978 paid as service tax before 01.06.2007, as the services were not taxable prior to that date. 5. The appellant has crossed the bar of unjust enrichment by providing evidence that the tax burden was borne by them. 6. The appellant is entitled to interest on the delayed refund payment as per Section 11BB of the Central Excise Act, 1944, from the expiry of 3 months from the date of the original refund application. 7.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.