Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 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.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
