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 held that the consortium's services constituted works contract service under Section 65A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal rejected exemption claims under Notifications 11/2010-ST, 32/2010-ST, and 45/2010-ST, finding they did not apply to EPC contract services. The extended period of limitation was not invoked due to bonafide belief and interpretational confusion. Penalties were set aside considering the appellant's government undertaking status. The appeal was partly allowed, upholding service tax classification while providing relief on limitation and penalties.
CESTAT held that the consortium's services constituted works contract service under Section 65A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal rejected exemption claims under Notifications 11/2010-ST, 32/2010-ST, and 45/2010-ST, finding they did not apply to EPC contract services. The extended period of limitation was not invoked due to bonafide belief and interpretational confusion. Penalties were set aside considering the appellant's government undertaking status. The appeal was partly allowed, upholding service tax classification while providing relief on limitation and penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
