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...
Customs relief for Strait of Hormuz maritime disruptions remains available, with existing conditions continuing unchanged through the extended validit...
Reverse charge on royalty for mining rights was held inapplicable where the appellants had not been shown to hold any mining licence or to have paid royalty as licence holders. The Tribunal accepted the explanation that the accounting entry described as royalty represented only the royalty portion withheld in works contract bills until proof of purchase from licensed vendors was furnished, and not consideration for assignment of any right to use natural resources; the service tax demand therefore failed on merits. It further held that the extended period could not be invoked on balance sheet entries alone, without corroborative evidence of suppression or taxable receipt, so the notices were also barred by limitation.
Reverse charge on royalty for mining rights was held inapplicable where the appellants had not been shown to hold any mining licence or to have paid royalty as licence holders. The Tribunal accepted the explanation that the accounting entry described as royalty represented only the royalty portion withheld in works contract bills until proof of purchase from licensed vendors was furnished, and not consideration for assignment of any right to use natural resources; the service tax demand therefore failed on merits. It further held that the extended period could not be invoked on balance sheet entries alone, without corroborative evidence of suppression or taxable receipt, so the notices were also barred by limitation.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.