Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving works contract services for construction projects. The tribunal ruled that construction services for educational institutions and government buildings do not constitute taxable works contract services primarily for commercial purposes. Construction of center-medians on highways was deemed a works contract "in respect of roads" and thus exempt from service tax. The tribunal found the service tax demand time-barred, determining no willful suppression of facts by the appellant. The extended limitation period was incorrectly invoked, and the entire service tax demand was set aside. Appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, effectively nullifying the tax assessment.
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving works contract services for construction projects. The tribunal ruled that construction services for educational institutions and government buildings do not constitute taxable works contract services primarily for commercial purposes. Construction of center-medians on highways was deemed a works contract "in respect of roads" and thus exempt from service tax. The tribunal found the service tax demand time-barred, determining no willful suppression of facts by the appellant. The extended limitation period was incorrectly invoked, and the entire service tax demand was set aside. Appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, effectively nullifying the tax assessment.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4788
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
