Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
561 to 580 of 96177 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The HC held that the departmental appeal was maintainable despite the monetary limit because the dispute raised a substantial question of law on whether the Barauni storage or discharge facility was incidental to pipeline transport or an independent taxable service. Reading the MOU with the statutory definition, the Court found that separate consideration was charged for the terminal facility and that, without storage at Barauni, the crude oil could not be moved to the next mode of transport. It rejected the contentions of self-service and double taxation, restored the Commissioner's order, and affirmed service tax, interest and penalties on the storage and warehousing service.
The HC held that the departmental appeal was maintainable despite the monetary limit because the dispute raised a substantial question of law on whether the Barauni storage or discharge facility was incidental to pipeline transport or an independent taxable service. Reading the MOU with the statutory definition, the Court found that separate consideration was charged for the terminal facility and that, without storage at Barauni, the crude oil could not be moved to the next mode of transport. It rejected the contentions of self-service and double taxation, restored the Commissioner's order, and affirmed service tax, interest and penalties on the storage and warehousing service.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.