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 partially allowed the appeal concerning service tax demands on three residential construction projects. For Project Prakruti Nivas, comprising 612 individual villas completed with completion certificate dated 30.03.2009, the Tribunal held no service tax liability existed as construction concluded before 01.07.2010 when Construction of Residential Complex service became taxable. Similarly, Project Sri Vajralayam received regularisation certificate from Deputy Commissioner under Andhra Pradesh Government Order dated 31.12.2007, which CESTAT treated as equivalent to completion certificate under Board Circular 151/2/2012, establishing completion before the taxable period. However, Project Srinivasa Krupa was remanded for redetermination of service tax liability applying 25% taxable value under Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules 2006 as amended by Finance Act 2017, requiring recalculation of the demand rather than total consideration value.
CESTAT partially allowed the appeal concerning service tax demands on three residential construction projects. For Project Prakruti Nivas, comprising 612 individual villas completed with completion certificate dated 30.03.2009, the Tribunal held no service tax liability existed as construction concluded before 01.07.2010 when Construction of Residential Complex service became taxable. Similarly, Project Sri Vajralayam received regularisation certificate from Deputy Commissioner under Andhra Pradesh Government Order dated 31.12.2007, which CESTAT treated as equivalent to completion certificate under Board Circular 151/2/2012, establishing completion before the taxable period. However, Project Srinivasa Krupa was remanded for redetermination of service tax liability applying 25% taxable value under Rule 2A of Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules 2006 as amended by Finance Act 2017, requiring recalculation of the demand rather than total consideration value.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
