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...
Non-filing of ST-3 returns - Bonafide belief - business of maintenance/house keeping of NTPC guest house - the appellant assesse should have intimated the Department by filing either NIL ST-3 Returns or an intimation explaining the reasons for non-filing of service tax returns. Similarly, the adjudicating authority should have called for the details and further when an appeal was already pending before the first Appellate Authority for the period April, 2006 to March, 2008, they should have waited for final outcome of the Appellate Order. - AT
Non-filing of ST-3 returns - Bonafide belief - business of maintenance/house keeping of NTPC guest house - the appellant assesse should have intimated the Department by filing either NIL ST-3 Returns or an intimation explaining the reasons for non-filing of service tax returns. Similarly, the adjudicating authority should have called for the details and further when an appeal was already pending before the first Appellate Authority for the period April, 2006 to March, 2008, they should have waited for final outcome of the Appellate Order. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4786
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
