The Tribunal ruled that coal extraction and processing constitute manufacture, not mining services, making service tax demand unsustainable and reinforcing mutual exclusivity of tax levies.
The Tribunal supported the CIT(A)s decision to allow a new claim under Section 10A, noting that appellate proceedings are a continuation of assessment and aimed at determining correct tax liability.
The Court held that adjusting a refund against a disputed demand during the subsistence of a stay order is illegal and arbitrary, directing release of the refund with interest.
The Tribunal held that deduction cannot be rejected merely due to absence of supporting evidence without examining merits. It remanded the matter for fresh verification of the claim.
The Tribunal held that a penalty notice lacking clarity on whether it relates to concealment or inaccurate particulars is invalid. It ruled that such a defect makes the penalty unsustainable.
Considering the duration of custody and the likely delay in trial, the Court found continued detention unnecessary. It granted bail while noting that the case would be decided on merits later.
The court directed payment for restoration costs after authorities admitted using private land. It held that such use affecting land fertility warrants compensation.
The Tribunal held that BLT cannot be used for transfer pricing adjustments on AMP expenses. It ruled that no adjustment was warranted based on binding precedents.
The Tribunal set aside additions to book profit after ruling that MAT provisions do not apply to banks established under a special statute. It emphasized that such entities are not companies under the Companies Act.
The Tribunal held that including income from scrap sale, already subject to excise duty, in service tax valuation would lead to double taxation. It ruled that such addition is not permissible and set aside the demand.
