Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
The Appellant's appeals are allowed and the impugned order is set aside. CESTAT holds that the licence agreements between the State-owned entity's catering arm and third-party licensees constituted contracts to set up and operate food plazas-commercial operational arrangements governed by substance-over-form-rather than "renting of immovable property" services under the applicable levy provisions. The Tribunal finds the transactions to be revenue-sharing business arrangements for provision of public utility catering, not taxable service supplies; the amounts charged do not constitute the requisite quid pro quo for a taxable service. Consequently, the service tax demand (and related limitation plea) is unsustainable and is annulled.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.