Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT held that the advertisement charges collected by the appellant as reimbursement expense cannot be included in the gross value of franchise service. The revenue's case was based on Rule 5(1) and 5(2) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, which were held unconstitutional and ultra vires the Finance Act, 1994. The advertisement expenses were ultimately borne by the franchisees as part of their business expenses and cannot be included in the gross value of franchise service. Consequently, the impugned order allowing the revenue's appeal was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the advertisement charges collected by the appellant as reimbursement expense cannot be included in the gross value of franchise service. The revenue's case was based on Rule 5(1) and 5(2) of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, which were held unconstitutional and ultra vires the Finance Act, 1994. The advertisement expenses were ultimately borne by the franchisees as part of their business expenses and cannot be included in the gross value of franchise service. Consequently, the impugned order allowing the revenue's appeal was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
