https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93675 The CESTAT held that the impugned SCN was unsustainable because it failed to specify which taxable category applied to each receipt, and a statement issued under s.73(1A) was invalid where its grounds differed from the earlier SCN; accordingly demands on unspecified receipts were set aside. The Tribunal found the appellant to be a Governmental Authority and, for the years concerned, receipts relating to municipal functions and non-commercial construction are exempt under the relevant mega-notification; composite construction taxability could not be sustained without valuation machinery. Reverse-charge liability for legal services did not attach to the Governmental Authority. Matters concerning taxable commercial construction were remanded for quantification; penalty under s.70 read with Rule 7C was upheld. Appeals partially allowed and remitted. en-us Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:06 +0530 Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93675 The CESTAT held that the impugned SCN was unsustainable because it failed to specify which taxable category applied to each receipt, and a statement issued under s.73(1A) was invalid where its grounds differed from the earlier SCN; accordingly demands on unspecified receipts were set aside. The Tribunal found the appellant to be a Governmental Authority and, for the years concerned, receipts relating to municipal functions and non-commercial construction are exempt under the relevant mega-notification; composite construction taxability could not be sustained without valuation machinery. Reverse-charge liability for legal services did not attach to the Governmental Authority. Matters concerning taxable commercial construction were remanded for quantification; penalty under s.70 read with Rule 7C was upheld. Appeals partially allowed and remitted. Highlights Service Tax Thu, 30 Oct 2025 08:22:06 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=93675