Specialized Investment Fund distribution now requires dedicated certification, while transitional recognition preserves existing qualified distributor...
Overlapping GST proceedings require Central and State authorities to designate one competent authority for coordinated adjudication of the same matter...
Composite healthcare supplies retain exemption when patient care is the contract's essential character, despite payment through an implementing agency...
For the pre-14.05.2015 period, service tax valuation under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 was confined to the consideration charged for the taxable service and could not be expanded to losses or unrecovered expenditure. The Court noted that Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 had already been held ultra vires Section 67, and that the amendment treating reimbursable expenditure as part of 'consideration' operated only prospectively from 14.05.2015. As the show cause notice covered an earlier period, the demand based on Rule 5(1) was untenable and was quashed as without jurisdiction.
For the pre-14.05.2015 period, service tax valuation under Section 67 of the Finance Act, 1994 was confined to the consideration charged for the taxable service and could not be expanded to losses or unrecovered expenditure. The Court noted that Rule 5(1) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006 had already been held ultra vires Section 67, and that the amendment treating reimbursable expenditure as part of 'consideration' operated only prospectively from 14.05.2015. As the show cause notice covered an earlier period, the demand based on Rule 5(1) was untenable and was quashed as without jurisdiction.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4796
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
