Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
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.