Human-probability test defeats political donation deductions where banking records mask accommodation-entry fund layering rather than genuine contribu...
CESTAT upheld that the appellant is liable to service tax for site formation, clearance, excavation, earthmoving and demolition services for the period 2008-09 to 30.06.2012, rejecting its works-contract classification argument and denial of liability. The Tribunal affirmed denial of exemption under the relevant notification for lack of contractual evidence and sustained invocation of the extended period, finding wilful evasion and rejecting bona fide ignorance. CESTAT partially set aside penalties (reducing the penalty imposed under Section 78 to the limited extent specified) but did not disturb demands acknowledged by the appellant. The Tribunal remitted the balance of duty, interest and penalties to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication with limited legal observations; appeal allowed in part.
CESTAT upheld that the appellant is liable to service tax for site formation, clearance, excavation, earthmoving and demolition services for the period 2008-09 to 30.06.2012, rejecting its works-contract classification argument and denial of liability. The Tribunal affirmed denial of exemption under the relevant notification for lack of contractual evidence and sustained invocation of the extended period, finding wilful evasion and rejecting bona fide ignorance. CESTAT partially set aside penalties (reducing the penalty imposed under Section 78 to the limited extent specified) but did not disturb demands acknowledged by the appellant. The Tribunal remitted the balance of duty, interest and penalties to the adjudicating authority for de novo adjudication with limited legal observations; appeal allowed in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4921 
