Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The case before CESTAT involved the classification of "convenience fee" and "cancellation charges" as either Air Travel Agent Services or Business Auxiliary Services. CESTAT held that these fees, collected by the appellant, were not part of any other service provided. The charges were found to relate solely to the service of booking air tickets. CESTAT also determined that the fees did not attract additional service tax liability before or after 01.07.2012. The tribunal rejected the imposition of penalties, citing lack of evidence of intent to evade duty and the appellant's belief that the fees were not taxable. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
The case before CESTAT involved the classification of "convenience fee" and "cancellation charges" as either Air Travel Agent Services or Business Auxiliary Services. CESTAT held that these fees, collected by the appellant, were not part of any other service provided. The charges were found to relate solely to the service of booking air tickets. CESTAT also determined that the fees did not attract additional service tax liability before or after 01.07.2012. The tribunal rejected the imposition of penalties, citing lack of evidence of intent to evade duty and the appellant's belief that the fees were not taxable. The appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
