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 tribunal held that the insurance scheme and surcharge charged by the appellant did not amount to premium as there was no insurance policy issued mentioning conditions and circumstances for indemnifying passengers. To issue an insurance policy, the appellant must be licensed by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA). The surcharge collected prior to 1.7.2012 was not in the nature of premium, and the activity was not covered under 'general insurance' as per the Finance Act, 1994. The transportation of passengers as stage carriage was exempted from service tax. The surcharge was inseparable from the ticket cost, and the main service of stage carriage was not taxable. Consequently, no service tax, penalty, or interest was payable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The tribunal held that the insurance scheme and surcharge charged by the appellant did not amount to premium as there was no insurance policy issued mentioning conditions and circumstances for indemnifying passengers. To issue an insurance policy, the appellant must be licensed by the Insurance Regulatory and Development Authority (IRDA). The surcharge collected prior to 1.7.2012 was not in the nature of premium, and the activity was not covered under 'general insurance' as per the Finance Act, 1994. The transportation of passengers as stage carriage was exempted from service tax. The surcharge was inseparable from the ticket cost, and the main service of stage carriage was not taxable. Consequently, no service tax, penalty, or interest was payable. The impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.