Bogus donation receipts justified commission income assessment and defeated political-party tax exemption for inaccurate accounts and reporting failur...
Pure reimbursement without income element escapes tax withholding, while delayed withholding and unsupported provisions face deferred or renewed scrut...
Public benefit requirement defeats charitable registration where residents' association services are reciprocal, member-only facilities governed by mu...
Exempt-income expenditure disallowance is confined to investments that actually generated exempt income, while supported business expenses remain dedu...
Eligibility of claiming CENVAT credit for service tax paid on renting immovable property services. The lower authority denied the credit, considering it as a service related to setting up premises, which was removed from the definition of input service u/r 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.03.2011. However, the Tribunal held that renting immovable property service is directly used for providing the output service, and hence covered under the main clause of the input service definition. The exclusion of "setting up" from the inclusion clause does not impact this, as the inclusion clause is merely clarificatory. The Tribunal relied on the NAVIN FLOURINE case, which allowed CENVAT credit for such services, as they were used in relation to manufacturing the final product. Since renting immovable property service is not covered under the exclusion clause, even after 01.04.2011, it continued to be an admissible input service for availing CENVAT credit. Consequently, the demand for denying CENVAT credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Eligibility of claiming CENVAT credit for service tax paid on renting immovable property services. The lower authority denied the credit, considering it as a service related to setting up premises, which was removed from the definition of input service u/r 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004 with effect from 01.03.2011. However, the Tribunal held that renting immovable property service is directly used for providing the output service, and hence covered under the main clause of the input service definition. The exclusion of "setting up" from the inclusion clause does not impact this, as the inclusion clause is merely clarificatory. The Tribunal relied on the NAVIN FLOURINE case, which allowed CENVAT credit for such services, as they were used in relation to manufacturing the final product. Since renting immovable property service is not covered under the exclusion clause, even after 01.04.2011, it continued to be an admissible input service for availing CENVAT credit. Consequently, the demand for denying CENVAT credit was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4790
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
