Input tax credit conditions remain constitutionally valid, with eligible recipient claims considered under GST circulars and retrospective filing dead...
Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
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.