<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (1) TMI 1258 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765194</link>
    <description>CESTAT Kolkata held that a statutory development authority performing sovereign functions on behalf of the state government was partially exempt from service tax. While licensing and land development fees collected as mandatory sovereign functions were exempt, commercial services like property rental and equipment leasing remained taxable. The tribunal found the revenue&#039;s demand quantification unscientific and lacking documentary evidence, making the confirmed demand of Rs. 2,95,48,401 legally unsustainable. Additionally, proceedings for 2007-2012 were partly time-barred as the authority had bona fide belief in exemption based on its statutory nature. The appeal was allowed on merits and time limitation grounds.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Jan 2025 08:24:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=792434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (1) TMI 1258 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765194</link>
      <description>CESTAT Kolkata held that a statutory development authority performing sovereign functions on behalf of the state government was partially exempt from service tax. While licensing and land development fees collected as mandatory sovereign functions were exempt, commercial services like property rental and equipment leasing remained taxable. The tribunal found the revenue&#039;s demand quantification unscientific and lacking documentary evidence, making the confirmed demand of Rs. 2,95,48,401 legally unsustainable. Additionally, proceedings for 2007-2012 were partly time-barred as the authority had bona fide belief in exemption based on its statutory nature. The appeal was allowed on merits and time limitation grounds.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 11 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765194</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>