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 allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand for service tax on facilitation charges paid by the Appellant to a related generator. The Tribunal held that the generator's production of electricity constituted "manufacture" and, during the relevant period, electricity qualified as "goods" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act; manufacture was expressly excluded from the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service," hence the charges were not exigible to service tax. Consequential demands for interest and penalties were held untenable because the primary demand was unsustainable. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected as departmental awareness of the cogeneration arrangement precluded extended limitation. Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand for service tax on facilitation charges paid by the Appellant to a related generator. The Tribunal held that the generator's production of electricity constituted "manufacture" and, during the relevant period, electricity qualified as "goods" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act; manufacture was expressly excluded from the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service," hence the charges were not exigible to service tax. Consequential demands for interest and penalties were held untenable because the primary demand was unsustainable. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected as departmental awareness of the cogeneration arrangement precluded extended limitation. Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
