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 of a resident welfare association, setting aside the service tax demand with interest and penalty. It held that electricity charges for common areas, billed in the association's name and recovered on a pro rata basis, constituted expenses incurred in providing common area management services and formed part of taxable value, not pure agent services. Conversely, water charges were treated as pure agent transactions and could not be included in taxable value. However, as the appellant had a bona fide belief, disclosed figures in ST-3 returns, and did not collect tax from members, invocation of the extended limitation period was impermissible, rendering the entire demand time-barred.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of a resident welfare association, setting aside the service tax demand with interest and penalty. It held that electricity charges for common areas, billed in the association's name and recovered on a pro rata basis, constituted expenses incurred in providing common area management services and formed part of taxable value, not pure agent services. Conversely, water charges were treated as pure agent transactions and could not be included in taxable value. However, as the appellant had a bona fide belief, disclosed figures in ST-3 returns, and did not collect tax from members, invocation of the extended limitation period was impermissible, rendering the entire demand time-barred.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.