Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
Receipt of immovable property requires actual possession or enjoyment; redevelopment allotments exchanged for tenancy rights fall outside deemed incom...
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4792
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
