https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784764 Service tax demand on amounts collected by a transmission utility towards pro-rata and development charges was rejected because the charges related to network development integral to electricity transmission, an exempt service under CBIC notifications/circulars; no tax was payable on these heads. Service tax on erection charges was also set aside as the amounts were recovered for shifting overhead cables/wires, treated as exempt per CBIC Circular No. 123/5/2010-TRU; no tax was payable on this head. For material cost and contingency charges, the Tribunal upheld remand for fresh quantification based on data to be furnished; liability, if any, to be recomputed by the adjudicating authority. Extended limitation was held inapplicable since facts were within departmental knowledge; demand beyond normal period was not sustainable. Appeal allowed by remand. en-us Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:31:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784764 Service tax demand on amounts collected by a transmission utility towards pro-rata and development charges was rejected because the charges related to network development integral to electricity transmission, an exempt service under CBIC notifications/circulars; no tax was payable on these heads. Service tax on erection charges was also set aside as the amounts were recovered for shifting overhead cables/wires, treated as exempt per CBIC Circular No. 123/5/2010-TRU; no tax was payable on this head. For material cost and contingency charges, the Tribunal upheld remand for fresh quantification based on data to be furnished; liability, if any, to be recomputed by the adjudicating authority. Extended limitation was held inapplicable since facts were within departmental knowledge; demand beyond normal period was not sustainable. Appeal allowed by remand. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 09 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784764