Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal of the assessee-sub-contractor seeking service tax exemption under N/N. 25/2012-ST. The Tribunal held that the exemption for sub-contractors under the notification is confined to services provided by way of works contract involving transfer of property in goods as per Section 65B(54) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant was found to be rendering advisory/consultancy services on a commission basis, which are not covered under Section 66D and are taxable. The Tribunal further upheld invocation of the extended period, noting suppression of facts and absence of any plea on limitation, and sustained the impugned demand.
The CESTAT dismissed the appeal of the assessee-sub-contractor seeking service tax exemption under N/N. 25/2012-ST. The Tribunal held that the exemption for sub-contractors under the notification is confined to services provided by way of works contract involving transfer of property in goods as per Section 65B(54) of the Finance Act, 1994. The appellant was found to be rendering advisory/consultancy services on a commission basis, which are not covered under Section 66D and are taxable. The Tribunal further upheld invocation of the extended period, noting suppression of facts and absence of any plea on limitation, and sustained the impugned demand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4827 
Join Channel 
