Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
CESTAT held that the construction services rendered by the appellant to a State power corporation for Almatti Dam Power House and appurtenant structures formed an integral part of dam construction and were therefore excluded from the levy of service tax under the relevant exemption. The impugned order denying exemption was set aside on merits. However, as the appellant had voluntarily paid service tax under the respective service heads pursuant to audit observations, CESTAT held that any refund could only be claimed in accordance with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as applied to service tax, including the statutory limitation period. The appeal was allowed on merits and the original authority was directed to process the refund in terms of Section 11B(5)(ec).
CESTAT held that the construction services rendered by the appellant to a State power corporation for Almatti Dam Power House and appurtenant structures formed an integral part of dam construction and were therefore excluded from the levy of service tax under the relevant exemption. The impugned order denying exemption was set aside on merits. However, as the appellant had voluntarily paid service tax under the respective service heads pursuant to audit observations, CESTAT held that any refund could only be claimed in accordance with Section 11B of the Central Excise Act, 1944, as applied to service tax, including the statutory limitation period. The appeal was allowed on merits and the original authority was directed to process the refund in terms of Section 11B(5)(ec).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
