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 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.
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.