Service-tax treatment of lease termination payments depends on their character and receipt. A compensatory sum stipulated for premature vacation, not received under a compromise and not representing rent for continued occupation, is excluded from taxable renting consideration. Lease-rent liability for a period after vacation requires exclusion of unsupported rent, availability of the small-service-provider exemption, and adjustment for tax previously paid. Where competing lease agreements state different rents, a rent figure corroborated by the tenant's confirmation supports tax computation, while a later lower-rent agreement may be less credible. The discussion distinguishes unreceived breach compensation from taxable actual lease rent.

Free-of-cost materials supplied by customers do not form part of the gross amount charged for valuing works contract services, excluding the corresponding service tax component. Construction of a hospital remains commercial or industrial construction service unless charitable use is established. For post-July 2012 works contracts, Rule 2A permits exclusion of established actual goods value or prescribed presumptive valuation; abatement applies where no higher actual goods value is proved, with provider liability reduced to reflect recipient-side tax liability. Services remain classified as exclusive service contracts where a works-contract classification is unsupported. Verified service tax deposits may be adjusted against confirmed liability. Non-payment, non-filing of returns and non-disclosure detected through investigation support service tax penalties.

Exclusive liquor-branding and display arrangements constituted taxable promotional activity rather than trading margins, with service-tax liability limited to the normal limitation period. Separately invoiced food and beverages supplied to hotel rooms did not fall within restaurant service because rooms were not restaurant premises and the supplies constituted sale or transfer of goods. Electricity charges recovered from tenants at actual sub-metered consumption and remitted to suppliers were not consideration for renting services and could not be included in taxable value as reimbursement. Extended recovery was unavailable where the notice did not invoke the statutory proviso and no wilful suppression or intent to evade tax was established.

E-governance portal and data-digitisation services facilitating access to State-owned data did not satisfy OIDAR, because the provider did not give access to data possessed by it. Support for governmental, university, and educational functions was not directed to business or commerce and therefore did not fall within business auxiliary or business support services before the negative-list regime. From 1 July 2012, portal services supplied to universities and educational institutions fell within the relevant educational-service exemption. Interest on fixed deposits of temporarily retained fee and bill collections represented the bank-paid time value of money, rather than consideration for a service, and was outside the service-tax charge.

Patent illegality is unavailable as a ground to set aside an award in an international commercial arbitration. Contractual clauses excluding service tax from a contractor's ordinary tax liabilities and requiring actual, genuine payment permit reimbursement of service tax directly paid under the reverse charge mechanism for project-related input services. Such services may include manpower, transport and security services, including those obtained through subcontractors, provided they relate to contract performance. Reimbursement is limited to tax proven to have been directly deposited; vendor-paid amounts without proof of actual deposit are excluded. A reasonable interpretation allowing this reimbursement does not conflict with the public policy of India, leaving the award enforceable.

Mega Exemption Notification No. 25/2012-ST, covering construction, erection, commissioning or installation of original works, was considered alongside the scope of Commercial or Industrial Construction Service and an employee-employer relationship. The Supreme Court found no good ground to interfere with the common Tribunal orders and dismissed the appeals, leaving those orders undisturbed.

PMLA attachment of a bank balance requires an identifiable nexus between the property and proceeds of crime derived from a scheduled offence. No fintech or service-provider entity was shown to operate the relevant lending application, and predicate-offence chargesheets neither implicated the appellant nor attributed alleged criminal activity to that application. Alleged commission income was not linked to identified criminal proceeds, while an outstanding contractual loan component could not, without further material, be characterised as proceeds of crime. As the available bank balance was not specifically traced to a scheduled offence, the required nexus was absent and the property could not be treated as proceeds of crime.

Individual shareholders lack appellate standing as persons aggrieved to challenge approval of a resolution plan under the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Shareholder interests are represented through the resolution professional or liquidator, and individual challenges would disrupt the time-bound insolvency process. Unsupported allegations of fraud or collusion do not create an exception. Homebuyers who did not independently challenge the resolution plan cannot contest it indirectly by supporting a shareholder's appeal.

Time exclusion for a successful resolution applicant's financial performance is consistent with implementing, rather than modifying, an approved resolution plan where possession was not delivered despite full upfront payment. Delay attributable to continued unauthorised occupation may therefore be excluded and the balance-payment period extended, provided the plan's substantive terms remain unchanged. Recall standing is unavailable to a shareholder and personal guarantor who was neither creditor nor party or permitted intervenor in the implementation proceedings, absent legal injury from the extension. The suspended management's procedural interests remain subordinate to the insolvency process after creditor commercial wisdom has been exercised.

Commercial proceedings by or against a company in liquidation require the Tribunal's leave under the Companies Act and the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code. Without that leave, proceedings cannot continue, particularly where the liquidator has not been served in the pending suit. Where relief arises from a subcontractual arrangement and is sought jointly against the principal employer and the corporate debtor, deleting the corporate debtor does not preserve the suit or an appellate challenge. The proceedings remain unsustainable without the Tribunal's leave.

Section 32A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code ends a corporate debtor's criminal liability for offences committed before commencement of CIRP and bars prosecution where an approved resolution plan transfers management or control to a new person unconnected with the prior management. Immunity applies when the alleged offences concern the earlier management and the statutory change-of-control conditions are met. On those conditions, the corporate debtor is protected from prosecution for pre-CIRP environmental offences; criminal proceedings and the cognizance order may be quashed as against the company, without affecting proceedings against other accused persons.

Disputes over a liquidator's authority to represent a joint venture and continue an arbitral reference concern representation and continuation of proceedings, rather than the existence of the arbitration agreement or the Tribunal's subject-matter jurisdiction. Consistent with minimal judicial intervention and the Tribunal's competence to rule on jurisdiction, such issues are to be determined within the arbitral process. Supervisory review under Article 227 is confined to exceptional circumstances involving a patent lack of inherent jurisdiction. Delayed objections after notice of the liquidator's asserted authority, particularly following completion of evidence, may support findings of acquiescence and an attempt to derail arbitration rather than grounds for supervisory intervention.

Recovery of fees collected through unregistered investment advisory services was addressed in connection with the finality of an unchallenged adjudication order. The Supreme Court found no good ground to interfere with the Securities Appellate Tribunal's impugned order and dismissed the appeal, leaving that order undisturbed. The material concerns fee recovery arising from unregistered advisory activity and appellate non-interference.

Reassessment under Section 17(4) of the Customs Act cannot sustain enhancement of an imported goods' declared value without a reasoned order under Section 17(5). Failure to issue that statutory order breaches the prescribed procedure for rejecting the declared transaction value and reassessing imported goods. The enhanced assessments were therefore unsustainable, and the declared value had to be accepted.

Section 129A(1), through its first proviso, excludes appellate jurisdiction over orders concerning goods imported or exported as baggage. Gold chains brought into India by an arriving international passenger retain their character as baggage regardless of recovery from the passenger, alleged non-declaration, concealment, intended use, invoice, or duty-evasion allegations. Challenges to orders concerning such baggage imports must proceed through revision before the Central Government under Section 129DD of the Customs Act, 1962, rather than through an appeal to the Tribunal.

Trade-policy amendments effective after goods are handed to the first carrier in a recognised multimodal shipment apply prospectively and do not govern that consignment; a later shipment-document date does not change the relevant date. Section 110A of the Customs Act provides the framework for considering provisional release of imported goods, subject to conditions permitted by law. Consideration of provisional release remains separate from the merits of customs adjudication.

The Supreme Court dismissed the appeal on its peculiar facts, declined to interfere with the Tribunal's orders, and left all questions of law open. The dispute addressed tariff classification, reliance on expert evidence, the Revenue's burden for reclassification, MEIS entitlement and cancellation, duty recovery contingent on DGFT action, shipping-bill finality, confiscation and redemption fine, extended limitation, and customs penalties.

Additions for unexplained money derived from a running seized ledger require debit and credit entries to be considered together. Where entries record continuing receipts and repayments, aggregating both sides may tax the same funds twice; taxation is therefore confined to the unreconciled peak-credit or net-balance difference. A debit recorded in a succeeding year that corresponds to a credit already considered in the preceding year must be telescoped against the earlier addition, preventing a separate addition for the same amount. Consequential commission additions are limited accordingly.

Termination compensation arising from an agency-like distribution arrangement is business income where ending the arrangement does not impair the profit-making apparatus, but taxable income cannot exceed the amount actually received or accrued. A non-compete covenant acquired with a trademark may constitute a depreciable business or commercial right. For eligible-unit profit deductions, only expenditure directly connected with the unit is allocable; corporate overheads lacking that nexus are excluded, while finance, research, travel, and sales-promotion allocations require factual verification. Receipts not directly derived from exports, including miscellaneous income, deferred sales-tax discounts, and termination compensation, are reduced from export-profit computation. The interaction of eligible-unit and export deductions, and remission taxation of discounted deferred sales-tax liabilities, require statutory determination on verified facts.

Under the India-Germany DTAA, royalties and fees for technical services are taxable on receipt rather than accrual where that treatment has consistently applied. Standard software supplied under restricted, non-exclusive, non-transferable licences without copyright exploitation rights does not generate royalty income. A consortium is not an association of persons where members perform separately identifiable work, invoice independently, retain separate profits and losses, and lack common management or a common income-earning design; joint customer liability alone is insufficient. Offshore goods-supply income is not chargeable in India under the treaty protocol. Transfer-pricing adjustments require prescribed methods and transaction analysis; an unexplained flat mark-up is unsustainable.