Mandatory textile export qualifiers distinguish flame-retardant fabrics from other listed fabrics for automated identification under the textiles ince...
Personal liberty safeguards restrict arrest after court-directed GST appearance, requiring interim release where authorities overreach pending proceed...
Alternative statutory remedy and delay bar GST writ challenges despite pending rectification, while distinct subject matter permits parallel proceedin...
Unverified Insight Portal Information Cannot Justify Reassessment Without a Verified Taxpayer-Specific Income-Escape Nexus or Demonstrated Application...
Assessing Officer jurisdiction after statutory transfer invalidates reassessment notices issued by transferor officers and nullifies resulting proceed...
Page of 4891
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
421 to 440 of 97809 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Nature of activity - sale or service - It is found from the fact on record that the “Shot Firers” are independent and technical expert to carry out the blasting, they are licensed with the Government’s Department of explosives. The revenue has not adduced any evidence to show that the “Shot Firers” were acting as an agent of the appellant. Therefore, the “Shot Firers” job was carried out not on the behalf of the appellant but on behalf of the buyer of the goods - In this fact the entire basis of the revenue that the “Shot Firers” have acted on behalf of the appellant is far from truth. Hence the entire foundation of the case gets demolished. - The activity undoubtedly is of sale of goods. The sale of goods does not attract Service Tax - AT
Nature of activity - sale or service - It is found from the fact on record that the “Shot Firers” are independent and technical expert to carry out the blasting, they are licensed with the Government’s Department of explosives. The revenue has not adduced any evidence to show that the “Shot Firers” were acting as an agent of the appellant. Therefore, the “Shot Firers” job was carried out not on the behalf of the appellant but on behalf of the buyer of the goods - In this fact the entire basis of the revenue that the “Shot Firers” have acted on behalf of the appellant is far from truth. Hence the entire foundation of the case gets demolished. - The activity undoubtedly is of sale of goods. The sale of goods does not attract Service Tax - AT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4891 
