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...
Page of 4920
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
61 to 80 of 98394 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The appellant's services cannot be classified as "Business Auxiliary Service" under the Export of Service Rules, 2005, and hence are not exempt from service tax. The services provided by the appellant relate to maintenance, repair, commissioning, installation, training, testing, certification, and IT software, which are not marketing or sales promotion services. Since the services are provided and used in India, they do not qualify as export of services. The extended period of limitation was rightly invoked as the audit revealed suppression of correct valuation. The penalty u/s 78 and interest on delayed payment are upheld. The appellant's services do not fall under "Commission Agent" in "Business Auxiliary Service" as per Section 65(19) and are not entitled to export service exemption as they are not used outside India. The Tribunal affirmed the impugned order, dismissing the appeal.
The appellant's services cannot be classified as "Business Auxiliary Service" under the Export of Service Rules, 2005, and hence are not exempt from service tax. The services provided by the appellant relate to maintenance, repair, commissioning, installation, training, testing, certification, and IT software, which are not marketing or sales promotion services. Since the services are provided and used in India, they do not qualify as export of services. The extended period of limitation was rightly invoked as the audit revealed suppression of correct valuation. The penalty u/s 78 and interest on delayed payment are upheld. The appellant's services do not fall under "Commission Agent" in "Business Auxiliary Service" as per Section 65(19) and are not entitled to export service exemption as they are not used outside India. The Tribunal affirmed the impugned order, dismissing the appeal.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.