Authentication of paper assessment orders upheld, while qualifying repairs, consumables and vendor advance write-offs remain deductible business claim...
Transaction value cannot be rejected solely on non-statutory valuation guidelines without corroborative evidence supporting reassessment of final cust...
Cross-examination rights and corroborated evidence limit customs penalties for misdeclaration in genuine import transactions involving documented clea...
Tariff classification of vehicle gear components follows the specific gearing entry, displacing motor-vehicle parts classification and related liabili...
Page of 4786
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
381 to 400 of 95715 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Liability for service tax u/s 66E of the Finance Act for 'tolerating an act' - Notice Pay, i.e., amount recovered from an employee for quitting before the prescribed period, is not liable to service tax. This is based on the decision in C.S.T. -SERVICE TAX - AHMEDABAD VERSUS INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS [2021 (6) TMI 906 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], where it was held that the amount recovered from an employee for quitting without serving the notice period is not subject to service tax. Consequently, the impugned order is unsustainable, and the appeal is allowed.
Liability for service tax u/s 66E of the Finance Act for 'tolerating an act' - Notice Pay, i.e., amount recovered from an employee for quitting before the prescribed period, is not liable to service tax. This is based on the decision in C.S.T. -SERVICE TAX - AHMEDABAD VERSUS INTAS PHARMACEUTICALS [2021 (6) TMI 906 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD], where it was held that the amount recovered from an employee for quitting without serving the notice period is not subject to service tax. Consequently, the impugned order is unsustainable, and the appeal is allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.