Religious purpose exclusion versus charitable purpose: non overriding religious objects do not attract Explanation 3, registration directed under sect...
Search-assessment proviso jurisdiction, time-barred valuation reports, and denial of cross-examination vitiate valuation-based and confession-based ad...
The HC upheld the tribunal's rejection of limitation, holding that the cause of action arose when the additional cost crossed the contractual threshold and the claim was thereafter pursued through the contractual mechanism and arbitration. However, it set aside the award for patent illegality and want of reasons because the claimant produced no evidence of actual tax payment at the enhanced rates, no proof of the contractual annual deduction, and a claim statement could not itself prove the claim. The tribunal also failed to consider the material defence that service tax was not leviable under the relied-upon notifications, rendering the award unreasoned and unsustainable.
The HC upheld the tribunal's rejection of limitation, holding that the cause of action arose when the additional cost crossed the contractual threshold and the claim was thereafter pursued through the contractual mechanism and arbitration. However, it set aside the award for patent illegality and want of reasons because the claimant produced no evidence of actual tax payment at the enhanced rates, no proof of the contractual annual deduction, and a claim statement could not itself prove the claim. The tribunal also failed to consider the material defence that service tax was not leviable under the relied-upon notifications, rendering the award unreasoned and unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
