Composite inpatient healthcare supply may retain exemption despite MRP medicine billing, while separate taxable sale characterisation remains disputed...
Working-capital adjustment determines whether software-services transfer-pricing margins fall within the statutory tolerance range, eliminating any ad...
Permanent establishment deductions upheld for expatriate salaries, direct costs and trading losses, while head-office costs require fresh classificati...
Data transmission equipment classification under CTSH 8517 62 remains distinct from residual classification, with exemption evidence requiring scrutin...
The High Court addressed the issue of refund of service tax paid in relation to subscription of a chit fund. It was held that the petitioner paid the tax upon demand by tax authorities, not due to a mistake of law. The 2015 amendment to the Finance Act was deemed substantive, not clarificatory, with prospective effect. Refunds for taxes paid before the amendment were permissible within the extended one-year limitation period from the judgment date. The court dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner's failure to apply within the extended time limit set by the court.
The High Court addressed the issue of refund of service tax paid in relation to subscription of a chit fund. It was held that the petitioner paid the tax upon demand by tax authorities, not due to a mistake of law. The 2015 amendment to the Finance Act was deemed substantive, not clarificatory, with prospective effect. Refunds for taxes paid before the amendment were permissible within the extended one-year limitation period from the judgment date. The court dismissed the petition, noting the petitioner's failure to apply within the extended time limit set by the court.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
