Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Page of 4778
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 95557 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.