https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93126 CESTAT held that the show-cause notice issued by the JC, CGST, Daman was valid because the registered office formed part of the factory's common business activity and its expenses were not separately accounted; any service-tax liability for that office would be payable by the factory. However, on merits the Tribunal concluded that the transfer/assignment of tenancy and occupancy rights in respect of the immovable property in Mumbai does not fall within the definition of "service" under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994, and amounts received for such transfer are not liable to service tax. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside; extended limitation not adjudicated. en-us Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:49 +0530 Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:50 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93126 CESTAT held that the show-cause notice issued by the JC, CGST, Daman was valid because the registered office formed part of the factory's common business activity and its expenses were not separately accounted; any service-tax liability for that office would be payable by the factory. However, on merits the Tribunal concluded that the transfer/assignment of tenancy and occupancy rights in respect of the immovable property in Mumbai does not fall within the definition of "service" under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994, and amounts received for such transfer are not liable to service tax. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside; extended limitation not adjudicated. Highlights Service Tax Tue, 07 Oct 2025 08:30:49 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93126