9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (2) TMI 304X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al , Advocate for the Appellant Shri V. Srikanth Rao , AR for the Respondent ORDER [ Order per : ANIL CHOUDHARY ] Heard the parties. 2. The brief facts involved are as follows : (i) The Appellant is registered with Service tax department for providing different categories of taxable services and were paying appropriate Service tax. (ii) As per Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 and Ru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unts of a person liable to pay service tax, where the transaction of taxable service is with any associated enterprise." (iv) Correspondingly, an explanation was added to sub-rule (1) under Rule 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 by Notification No. 19/2008-S.T., dated 10th May, 2008 as under: "Explanation - For the removal of doubts, it is hereby declared that where the transaction of taxable s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... from M/s Swarnandhara IJMI Integrated Township Development Company Pvt. Ltd. (SITCO), which is an 'Associated Enterprises' as per Section 92A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (since the Appellant holds 51% of share capital in SITCO). The said notice invoked the extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1) for proposing to demand tax and also interest under Section 75 of the Finance Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pute herein is squarely covered in favour of Appellant/Assessee by the ruling of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of GST, Delhi vs McDonalds India Pvt Ltd [2018 (8) GSTL 25 (Del)] 4. In view of the aforementioned observations and findings, we allow the Appeal and set aside the Impugned Order. The Appellant shall be entitled to consequential benefits in accordance ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
