https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781370 CESTAT held the departmental appeal unsustainable and dismissed it. Tribunal found the department failed to produce the approved layout plan required to displace the respondent-assessee's entitlement to the mega exemption for construction of residential complex; roads qualify as common facilities only if shown in the approved plan. The Tribunal also held invocation of Section 35A(3) of the Central Excise Act for a service-tax matter was improper and the statutory authorization to file the appeal was defective, rendering the appeal not maintainable. Consequently there was no infirmity in the impugned order. en-us Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 14 Nov 2025 10:26:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781370 CESTAT held the departmental appeal unsustainable and dismissed it. Tribunal found the department failed to produce the approved layout plan required to displace the respondent-assessee's entitlement to the mega exemption for construction of residential complex; roads qualify as common facilities only if shown in the approved plan. The Tribunal also held invocation of Section 35A(3) of the Central Excise Act for a service-tax matter was improper and the statutory authorization to file the appeal was defective, rendering the appeal not maintainable. Consequently there was no infirmity in the impugned order. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 17 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781370