https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384724 A completed land transfer for a joint venture project could not be recharacterised as renting of immovable property merely because later mutation or transfer was refused; the land cost was not a segregated service consideration, so no service tax arose on that arrangement. Grant of 51% equity in the joint venture was not Business Auxiliary Service because no promotional, marketing, agency, or similar activity and no taxable consideration were shown; the demand was also time-barred. Recovery of employee costs on actual reimbursement basis, without mark-up, was only cost sharing and not Business Auxiliary Service. The demand failed on merits and limitation, and relief followed. en-us Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 30 Oct 2020 12:44:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384724 A completed land transfer for a joint venture project could not be recharacterised as renting of immovable property merely because later mutation or transfer was refused; the land cost was not a segregated service consideration, so no service tax arose on that arrangement. Grant of 51% equity in the joint venture was not Business Auxiliary Service because no promotional, marketing, agency, or similar activity and no taxable consideration were shown; the demand was also time-barred. Recovery of employee costs on actual reimbursement basis, without mark-up, was only cost sharing and not Business Auxiliary Service. The demand failed on merits and limitation, and relief followed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 21 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384724