https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777772 CESTAT AT allowed the review application and rectified the final order dated 24.03.2025. It affirmed that the two institutes qualify as "Governmental Authority" and that services of construction-related works to such authorities are exempt. The bench clarified that the main contractor must be established as exempt under Sr. No.12A(a) before the sub-contractor can claim benefit under Sr. No.29(h) of Notification No.25/2012-ST. A specific sentence in para-11 was ordered deleted and the remand conditions in paras 12-13 were rectified accordingly. en-us Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Sep 2025 08:10:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777772 CESTAT AT allowed the review application and rectified the final order dated 24.03.2025. It affirmed that the two institutes qualify as "Governmental Authority" and that services of construction-related works to such authorities are exempt. The bench clarified that the main contractor must be established as exempt under Sr. No.12A(a) before the sub-contractor can claim benefit under Sr. No.29(h) of Notification No.25/2012-ST. A specific sentence in para-11 was ordered deleted and the remand conditions in paras 12-13 were rectified accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 04 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=777772