Reopening of assessment cannot rest solely on an audit party's opinion; reassessment under Section 147/148 is impermissible and power of revision shou...
Tested party selection: functional analysis identified the least complex unit as the appropriate tested party, altering the transfer pricing adjustmen...
Refund of service tax on composite works contracts was rejected because the appellant failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on, as the contract price was inclusive of tax and the customer had deducted part of the tax from payments. The Tribunal also found that the development and construction activities involved transfer of property in goods and therefore fell within works contract service, making the tax payment and corresponding refund claim untenable. It further reiterated that refund proceedings cannot be used to reopen unchallenged self-assessments or disturb assessments that have attained finality. The rejection of the refund claim was upheld.
Refund of service tax on composite works contracts was rejected because the appellant failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on, as the contract price was inclusive of tax and the customer had deducted part of the tax from payments. The Tribunal also found that the development and construction activities involved transfer of property in goods and therefore fell within works contract service, making the tax payment and corresponding refund claim untenable. It further reiterated that refund proceedings cannot be used to reopen unchallenged self-assessments or disturb assessments that have attained finality. The rejection of the refund claim was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
