Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3221 to 3240 of 96177 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 entered into works contracts for providing services along with materials. The show cause notice proposed demand under "commercial and industrial construction service", but the impugned order confirmed demand under "works contract service" for the period after 1st June 2007, without giving an opportunity to defend against this head. The order travelled beyond the show cause notice by demanding tax under a different head, which is impermissible as per settled legal position. Consequently, the order was set aside by the Appellate Tribunal on this ground alone.
The appellant entered into works contracts for providing services along with materials. The show cause notice proposed demand under "commercial and industrial construction service", but the impugned order confirmed demand under "works contract service" for the period after 1st June 2007, without giving an opportunity to defend against this head. The order travelled beyond the show cause notice by demanding tax under a different head, which is impermissible as per settled legal position. Consequently, the order was set aside by the Appellate Tribunal on this ground alone.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4809 
Join Channel 
