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 demand of service tax levied under the "Real Estate Agent Services" category against the Appellant, holding the transactions to be principal-to-principal sales of developed land/plotted property with no consideration for agency services; consequently, the tax demand, and related interest and penalties, were not sustainable. The Tribunal also observed that the Appellant had borne development risk, paid landowners fixed consideration, and retained profits as principal. With respect to the demand under "Construction of Residential Complex Service," the Appellant had already discharged tax and interest prior to the SCN, and therefore penalties in that regard were held not imposable. Appeal disposed of.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the demand of service tax levied under the "Real Estate Agent Services" category against the Appellant, holding the transactions to be principal-to-principal sales of developed land/plotted property with no consideration for agency services; consequently, the tax demand, and related interest and penalties, were not sustainable. The Tribunal also observed that the Appellant had borne development risk, paid landowners fixed consideration, and retained profits as principal. With respect to the demand under "Construction of Residential Complex Service," the Appellant had already discharged tax and interest prior to the SCN, and therefore penalties in that regard were held not imposable. Appeal disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
