Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
Specified income of Baddi Barotiwala Nalagarh Development Authority receives conditional tax exemption, retrospectively covering its designated assess...
Specified development authority income receives retrospective tax exemption, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return-...
Unified Brand India framework introduces voluntary Trust Mark certification and funding support for export branding, packaging and global promotional ...
Origin Declaration authentication governs preferential tariff claims under India-UK CETA, requiring a validated reference number before import clearan...
Separate assessment orders for different years remain valid when distinct notices and hearing opportunities prevent prejudice from combined proceeding...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1501 to 1520 of 96363 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A pure question of law bearing on taxability could be raised before the Tribunal even if not taken earlier, as Rule 10 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 permits additional grounds subject to hearing the other side. The service tax demand for April 2009 to June 2010 failed because it related to the same residential project already dealt with in the appellant's own case, where the earlier order had been set aside; the present demand had no surviving foundation and was also set aside. For July 2010 to March 2011, the demand under construction of complex service was unsustainable because the activity was composite in nature, as reflected by the abatement granted in the notice, and post-01.07.2010 such activity fell outside that category.
A pure question of law bearing on taxability could be raised before the Tribunal even if not taken earlier, as Rule 10 of the CESTAT (Procedure) Rules, 1982 permits additional grounds subject to hearing the other side. The service tax demand for April 2009 to June 2010 failed because it related to the same residential project already dealt with in the appellant's own case, where the earlier order had been set aside; the present demand had no surviving foundation and was also set aside. For July 2010 to March 2011, the demand under construction of complex service was unsustainable because the activity was composite in nature, as reflected by the abatement granted in the notice, and post-01.07.2010 such activity fell outside that category.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
