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 ...
Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1381 to 1400 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Painting and end-to-end execution services for residential, commercial and industrial premises were held not to constitute management, maintenance or repair service. The Tribunal noted that the services, on the admitted facts, were more appropriately covered by construction-related activity and that in the appellant's own case for a prior period the original authority had already treated the work as works contract service. The demand raised under management, maintenance or repair service was therefore unsustainable, and the activity was held to be correctly classifiable under works contract service. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed in accordance with law.
Painting and end-to-end execution services for residential, commercial and industrial premises were held not to constitute management, maintenance or repair service. The Tribunal noted that the services, on the admitted facts, were more appropriately covered by construction-related activity and that in the appellant's own case for a prior period the original authority had already treated the work as works contract service. The demand raised under management, maintenance or repair service was therefore unsustainable, and the activity was held to be correctly classifiable under works contract service. The impugned order was set aside and consequential relief followed in accordance with law.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.