Ratification of resignation acceptance validates separation retrospectively, while withdrawal may be refused through reasoned administrative discretio...
Nature-dependent electricity contracts receive new Ind AS accounting, hedge designation, transition and financial-statement disclosure requirements fr...
Alternative GST remedy permitted protective writ intervention for ex parte adjudication, preserving independent appellate review of input tax credit d...
Assessment against deceased sole proprietor requires proceedings against the legal representative, rendering prior assessment and appellate orders inv...
Residential waste collection classification under SAC 999423 defeats composite-supply exemption where facilitating goods are not transferred to the lo...
Page of 4805
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
261 to 280 of 96100 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Core procurement services rendered by a foreign group procurement hub to an Indian entity were held not to be intermediary services, because the arrangement satisfied neither the statutory two-supply character of an intermediary nor a mere facilitation role. The Tribunal treated the foreign entity as an independent contractor acting on its own account under a principal-to-principal arrangement, so the services were an import of services with place of supply in India and were taxable there, defeating the refund claim. It also held that a refund application under the GST refund framework cannot be rejected solely as an afterthought merely because tax was first paid and non-taxability was later asserted.
Core procurement services rendered by a foreign group procurement hub to an Indian entity were held not to be intermediary services, because the arrangement satisfied neither the statutory two-supply character of an intermediary nor a mere facilitation role. The Tribunal treated the foreign entity as an independent contractor acting on its own account under a principal-to-principal arrangement, so the services were an import of services with place of supply in India and were taxable there, defeating the refund claim. It also held that a refund application under the GST refund framework cannot be rejected solely as an afterthought merely because tax was first paid and non-taxability was later asserted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
