Pre-amendment reassessment limitation bars late notices under the preserved regime, invalidating consequential reassessment for affected earlier asses...
Cash-sales explanations for bank deposits require documentary reconciliation; reassessment notice survived where effective response time was available...
Functional comparability in transfer pricing prevents ad hoc arm's length adjustments where functions, assets, risks and reliable comparables are unes...
Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
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 4921 
