Development agreements require legal possession or effective enjoyment for capital gains transfer; permissive possession and deferred consideration de...
Prolonged sterilisation of development rights supports capital-gains treatment, while business-income disallowances cannot govern capital-gains comput...
Additional evidence in transfer pricing dispute leads to fresh examination, while tax deductions, TDS credit, fee and refund interest require verifica...
Category II AIF pass-through taxation preserves non-business income character; investment receipts cannot be reclassified without applying recognised ...
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.