Year-wise GST tax periods make composite show cause notices impermissible, requiring separate proceedings despite contrary non-jurisdictional preceden...
Prior APA methodology guides transfer pricing benchmarking where consistent FAR profiles support comparability and arm's length margins eliminate adju...
Refund of services tax - input services received by the unit of the appellant established in SEZ - refund rejected for alleged non-compliance of several conditions - The substantive benefit of service tax exemption provided under section 26 of the SEZ Act read with rule 31 of the SEZ Rules cannot be denied on procedural grounds. It is not in dispute that the appellant was not required to deposit service tax under the notification dated May 20, 2009, but service tax was deposited. It cannot be urged that the appellant is not entitled to claim refund because of a mistake in depositing service tax even if it was not required to be deposited. - AT
Refund of services tax - input services received by the unit of the appellant established in SEZ - refund rejected for alleged non-compliance of several conditions - The substantive benefit of service tax exemption provided under section 26 of the SEZ Act read with rule 31 of the SEZ Rules cannot be denied on procedural grounds. It is not in dispute that the appellant was not required to deposit service tax under the notification dated May 20, 2009, but service tax was deposited. It cannot be urged that the appellant is not entitled to claim refund because of a mistake in depositing service tax even if it was not required to be deposited. - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4886 
