https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784761 The dominant issue was whether construction services provided to a state housing board qualified for exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST (Sr. No. 12A) as services to a "governmental authority." Applying the test that the recipient must be established by the State with 90% or more government participation by way of equity or control and must perform functions entrusted to a municipality under Article 243W, the Tribunal held that no evidence was adduced to prove the housing board satisfied these statutory conditions, following its prior decision on the same entity. Consequently, the exemption was denied and the impugned order was upheld, resulting in dismissal of the appeal. en-us Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Jan 2026 09:31:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784761 The dominant issue was whether construction services provided to a state housing board qualified for exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST (Sr. No. 12A) as services to a "governmental authority." Applying the test that the recipient must be established by the State with 90% or more government participation by way of equity or control and must perform functions entrusted to a municipality under Article 243W, the Tribunal held that no evidence was adduced to prove the housing board satisfied these statutory conditions, following its prior decision on the same entity. Consequently, the exemption was denied and the impugned order was upheld, resulting in dismissal of the appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 08 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=784761