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...
The CESTAT held that service tax demand on works contract services rendered to educational institutions up to 01-07-2012 is unsustainable, as the Revenue failed to prove these constructions were primarily for commerce or industry. The exemption under Mega Exemption Notification 25/2012-ST did not apply beyond 01-04-2015 and was limited to services provided to government entities. For the period post 01-07-2012, the redefined "works contract" service is taxable regardless of the purpose of construction, thus the demand for this period is upheld, subject to limitation findings. The demand on works contract services rendered as a sub-contractor is also sustained. The extended period for demand is not invokable due to absence of willful suppression or fraud, limiting recoveries to the normal limitation period. Penalties under Sections 77(2) and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 are set aside. The appeal is allowed in part.
The CESTAT held that service tax demand on works contract services rendered to educational institutions up to 01-07-2012 is unsustainable, as the Revenue failed to prove these constructions were primarily for commerce or industry. The exemption under Mega Exemption Notification 25/2012-ST did not apply beyond 01-04-2015 and was limited to services provided to government entities. For the period post 01-07-2012, the redefined "works contract" service is taxable regardless of the purpose of construction, thus the demand for this period is upheld, subject to limitation findings. The demand on works contract services rendered as a sub-contractor is also sustained. The extended period for demand is not invokable due to absence of willful suppression or fraud, limiting recoveries to the normal limitation period. Penalties under Sections 77(2) and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 are set aside. The appeal is allowed in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
