Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
The CESTAT partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand related to Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRCS) on the grounds that the appellant complied with conditions under the relevant abatement notification and reversed the availed CENVAT credit. The Tribunal held that the transaction involving transfer of development rights and lump sum premium for commercial/vacant land amounted to a lease akin to sale, thus not taxable as renting of immovable property. Interest received on deferred payments was held to be penal and not includable in taxable value. Supply of water by the appellant, a government authority, was determined to be a sovereign function and not subject to service tax. Consequently, except for the CRCS activity where abatement applies, the service tax demand was confirmed. The denial of CENVAT credit was found unjustified as credits were reversed, negating further dispute on input credit eligibility.
The CESTAT partially allowed the appeal, setting aside the service tax demand related to Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRCS) on the grounds that the appellant complied with conditions under the relevant abatement notification and reversed the availed CENVAT credit. The Tribunal held that the transaction involving transfer of development rights and lump sum premium for commercial/vacant land amounted to a lease akin to sale, thus not taxable as renting of immovable property. Interest received on deferred payments was held to be penal and not includable in taxable value. Supply of water by the appellant, a government authority, was determined to be a sovereign function and not subject to service tax. Consequently, except for the CRCS activity where abatement applies, the service tax demand was confirmed. The denial of CENVAT credit was found unjustified as credits were reversed, negating further dispute on input credit eligibility.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
