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...
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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
