https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775474 The CESTAT held that the transfer of development rights and lump sum premium for commercial/vacant land constituted a lease akin to sale and was not taxable as renting of immovable property. The appellant was liable to pay service tax on Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRCS) but was entitled to abatement under Notification No. 29/2010, as no violation was proven and reversed CENVAT credit was acknowledged. Interest received on delayed payments was held not taxable as it amounted to liquidated damages. Supply of water by the government authority was deemed a sovereign function and not subject to service tax. The demand was set aside except for the CRCS activity, where the appellant's liability stood confirmed with abatement benefits allowed. The appeal was allowed in part. en-us Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Jul 2025 11:07:34 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775474 The CESTAT held that the transfer of development rights and lump sum premium for commercial/vacant land constituted a lease akin to sale and was not taxable as renting of immovable property. The appellant was liable to pay service tax on Construction of Residential Complex Service (CRCS) but was entitled to abatement under Notification No. 29/2010, as no violation was proven and reversed CENVAT credit was acknowledged. Interest received on delayed payments was held not taxable as it amounted to liquidated damages. Supply of water by the government authority was deemed a sovereign function and not subject to service tax. The demand was set aside except for the CRCS activity, where the appellant's liability stood confirmed with abatement benefits allowed. The appeal was allowed in part. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 24 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=775474