Refund claim dismissed as time-barred under s.142(5); non-obstante clause read restrictively, merits not decided, self-assessment payments not mere de...
Assessee's project-completion revenue recognition upheld; income addition deleted under Guidance Note/AS-9 and percentage-completion rules as complian...
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the service-tax demand, holding that the appellant's activity of placing and managing spare-parts inventory at customer premises does not constitute a taxable "supply of tangible goods service." The Tribunal found no material distinction from prior proceedings where VAT/CST was discharged on a deemed-sale basis and invoices were raised accordingly; in such circumstances, payment of VAT/CST precludes liability for service tax. Although the appellant failed to notify the Division Bench of an identical earlier decision, the Revenue produced no new facts to distinguish the matters. On the majority view, no service tax is payable and the appeal is allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the service-tax demand, holding that the appellant's activity of placing and managing spare-parts inventory at customer premises does not constitute a taxable "supply of tangible goods service." The Tribunal found no material distinction from prior proceedings where VAT/CST was discharged on a deemed-sale basis and invoices were raised accordingly; in such circumstances, payment of VAT/CST precludes liability for service tax. Although the appellant failed to notify the Division Bench of an identical earlier decision, the Revenue produced no new facts to distinguish the matters. On the majority view, no service tax is payable and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.