Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Supply of Services - activity of holding of shares of subsidiary company by holding company - During the proceedings, the Central and State Governments issued clarifications stating that merely holding shares in a subsidiary company by a holding company should not be treated as a "supply of service" under GST. Based on these clarifications, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the activity of holding shares in a subsidiary by a holding company cannot be construed as "supply of service" as per GST law. - Accordingly, the High court held that the impugned order was illegal and arbitrary, as it wrongly classified holding shares in a subsidiary as "supply of service".
Supply of Services - activity of holding of shares of subsidiary company by holding company - During the proceedings, the Central and State Governments issued clarifications stating that merely holding shares in a subsidiary company by a holding company should not be treated as a "supply of service" under GST. Based on these clarifications, the petitioner's counsel submitted that the activity of holding shares in a subsidiary by a holding company cannot be construed as "supply of service" as per GST law. - Accordingly, the High court held that the impugned order was illegal and arbitrary, as it wrongly classified holding shares in a subsidiary as "supply of service".
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
