Transfer-pricing aggregation of distinct support-service and subcontract transactions was rejected, while debt-free receivables attracted no notional ...
Customs exemptions cover photovoltaic assembly machinery and PVF backsheets, while fully declared cleared imports may avoid confiscation and penalties...
Specific tariff classification for LCD devices overrides treatment as electricity-meter parts, defeating differential duty, extended limitation, and p...
Stayed disciplinary punishment does not establish unfitness for insolvency professional registration; reconsideration must disregard mere pendency of ...
The case involved a dispute regarding the levy of service tax on liquidated damages, security deposit, earnest money deposit, and retention money. The Appellate Tribunal held that these amounts do not constitute consideration for tolerating an act under u/s 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its decision. Consequently, the appellant was deemed not liable to pay service tax on the forfeited amounts. The impugned order was found to lack merit and was set aside, resulting in the appeal being allowed.
The case involved a dispute regarding the levy of service tax on liquidated damages, security deposit, earnest money deposit, and retention money. The Appellate Tribunal held that these amounts do not constitute consideration for tolerating an act under u/s 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its decision. Consequently, the appellant was deemed not liable to pay service tax on the forfeited amounts. The impugned order was found to lack merit and was set aside, resulting in the appeal being allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.