Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Appellant failed to discharge service tax liability correctly, suppressed value of taxable services in ST-3 returns. Department relied on 26AS statement providing details of tax deducted/collected at source. Appellant did not cooperate with investigations, failed to substantiate claims. Extended period rightly invoked as per Supreme Court's ruling in Usha Rectifier case where information taken from Balance Sheet. Intent to evade tax established. Penalties u/ss 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 78 upheld. No infirmity in impugned order, appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Appellant failed to discharge service tax liability correctly, suppressed value of taxable services in ST-3 returns. Department relied on 26AS statement providing details of tax deducted/collected at source. Appellant did not cooperate with investigations, failed to substantiate claims. Extended period rightly invoked as per Supreme Court's ruling in Usha Rectifier case where information taken from Balance Sheet. Intent to evade tax established. Penalties u/ss 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 78 upheld. No infirmity in impugned order, appeal dismissed by Appellate Tribunal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
