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...
CESTAT upheld the levy of service tax on renting of immovable property, rejecting appellant's contention that such activity cannot be considered a service. The Tribunal determined that unless declared ultra vires by a constitutional court, the tax remains valid, noting that five different High Courts had previously affirmed this position. While the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 77 was sustained. The appellant must pay the service tax with appropriate interest. Appeal dismissed.
CESTAT upheld the levy of service tax on renting of immovable property, rejecting appellant's contention that such activity cannot be considered a service. The Tribunal determined that unless declared ultra vires by a constitutional court, the tax remains valid, noting that five different High Courts had previously affirmed this position. While the Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, the penalty of Rs. 10,000/- under section 77 was sustained. The appellant must pay the service tax with appropriate interest. Appeal dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.