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...
CESTAT allowed refund claims for service tax wrongly collected and paid on 'construction of complex' services during September 2008 to May 2010. Following KVR Construction precedent, the tribunal held that amounts paid under mistaken notion cannot be classified as service tax when no legal obligation existed. The limitation period under Section 11B of Central Excise Act 1944 was deemed inapplicable as the payment did not constitute legitimate service tax. The tribunal overturned the lower authorities' rejection of refund claims based on time limitation, affirming that service tax was not leviable on construction services prior to July 1, 2010, per the explanation to Section 65(105)(zza) of Finance Act, 1994.
CESTAT allowed refund claims for service tax wrongly collected and paid on 'construction of complex' services during September 2008 to May 2010. Following KVR Construction precedent, the tribunal held that amounts paid under mistaken notion cannot be classified as service tax when no legal obligation existed. The limitation period under Section 11B of Central Excise Act 1944 was deemed inapplicable as the payment did not constitute legitimate service tax. The tribunal overturned the lower authorities' rejection of refund claims based on time limitation, affirming that service tax was not leviable on construction services prior to July 1, 2010, per the explanation to Section 65(105)(zza) of Finance Act, 1994.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
