Mutual fund maturity rules require proper rollover, redemption, disclosure, and due diligence; investor gains cannot excuse regulatory breaches or pen...
Threshold exemption excludes exempt services, while stamp-paper purchases avoid reverse charge; consequential service tax penalties were also set asid...
Employee conflict disclosures and investment restrictions expand with new recusal duties, post-employment limits, and compliance reporting requirement...
The case pertains to the levy of service tax on commercial coaching or training services. The Finance Act, 2010 inserted an explanation in Section 65(105)(zzc) retrospectively from July 1, 2003, clarifying that the word 'commercial' would mean training or coaching services provided for consideration, irrespective of profit motive. Notification no. 33/2011 granted exemptions to coaching and training centers leading to a certificate, diploma, degree, or other educational qualification recognized by law. The Board clarified that 'recognized by any law' encompasses courses approved or recognized by any entity established under Central or State legislation for granting recognition to educational courses. The High Court found that the petitioner was neither affiliated with a University nor enabled by statute to grant degrees or diplomas. The CESTAT concluded that the petitioner's appeals lacked merit, while the Department's appeals were allowed. The petition was dismissed.
The case pertains to the levy of service tax on commercial coaching or training services. The Finance Act, 2010 inserted an explanation in Section 65(105)(zzc) retrospectively from July 1, 2003, clarifying that the word 'commercial' would mean training or coaching services provided for consideration, irrespective of profit motive. Notification no. 33/2011 granted exemptions to coaching and training centers leading to a certificate, diploma, degree, or other educational qualification recognized by law. The Board clarified that 'recognized by any law' encompasses courses approved or recognized by any entity established under Central or State legislation for granting recognition to educational courses. The High Court found that the petitioner was neither affiliated with a University nor enabled by statute to grant degrees or diplomas. The CESTAT concluded that the petitioner's appeals lacked merit, while the Department's appeals were allowed. The petition was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4805
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
