Commercial vehicle depreciation, scientifically determined warranty provisions and exempt-income disallowances were resolved in favour of the taxpayer...
Inherited property sale proceeds require capital-gains treatment where ownership is supported by evidence, not suspicion or unverified signature doubt...
Cross-examination of retracted statements is essential where foundational evidence supports a benami allegation and documented funding explanations re...
Capital-goods exemption covers plant-modernisation accessories, while the import restriction applies only to earlier capital-goods components and spar...
Constitutional judicial review permits challenges to ECIRs and connected money-laundering proceedings where coercive action affects fundamental intere...
Appellant provided 'Intermediary' services classifiable as business auxiliary services within taxable territory to foreign recipients. Service Tax returns showed activity as "Export of Service" with no Service Tax paid on commission earned from foreign service recipients for July 2012 to September 2015. Department viewed appellant as provider of 'Intermediary' services classified under business auxiliary services within India's taxable territory to various Schott group companies located outside India. Appellant contended similar demand was raised and dropped by department for March 2005 to September 2008, with no further demand after October 2008. Tribunal remanded matter for fresh consideration, directing Adjudicating Authority to give specific finding on applicability of extended period of limitation, as all facts were not available during initial adjudication. Tribunal relied on its own decision in SNQS International Socks case, endorsed by Supreme Court, favoring assessee on similar issue.
Appellant provided 'Intermediary' services classifiable as business auxiliary services within taxable territory to foreign recipients. Service Tax returns showed activity as "Export of Service" with no Service Tax paid on commission earned from foreign service recipients for July 2012 to September 2015. Department viewed appellant as provider of 'Intermediary' services classified under business auxiliary services within India's taxable territory to various Schott group companies located outside India. Appellant contended similar demand was raised and dropped by department for March 2005 to September 2008, with no further demand after October 2008. Tribunal remanded matter for fresh consideration, directing Adjudicating Authority to give specific finding on applicability of extended period of limitation, as all facts were not available during initial adjudication. Tribunal relied on its own decision in SNQS International Socks case, endorsed by Supreme Court, favoring assessee on similar issue.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4782
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
