Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
181 to 200 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT held that the rehabilitation of breakwaters constitutes a works contract service eligible for exemption under the relevant notification, as the activity pertains to a civil structure not intended for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession. The adjudicating authority erred by misinterpreting the scope of the exemption and unduly emphasizing the phrase "by way of" without legal justification. The Tribunal found that the exemption notification's limitation to civil structures for non-commercial use was overlooked, and the service tax demand proceedings against the appellant were rightly dropped by the Commissioner. Consequently, the impugned order denying exemption was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, affirming the appellant's entitlement to exemption on the service rendered to governmental authorities.
The CESTAT held that the rehabilitation of breakwaters constitutes a works contract service eligible for exemption under the relevant notification, as the activity pertains to a civil structure not intended for commerce, industry, or any other business or profession. The adjudicating authority erred by misinterpreting the scope of the exemption and unduly emphasizing the phrase "by way of" without legal justification. The Tribunal found that the exemption notification's limitation to civil structures for non-commercial use was overlooked, and the service tax demand proceedings against the appellant were rightly dropped by the Commissioner. Consequently, the impugned order denying exemption was set aside, and the appeal was allowed, affirming the appellant's entitlement to exemption on the service rendered to governmental authorities.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.