Contingency expenses, exempt-income disallowance, and royalty benchmarking: unsupported adjustments were deleted under consistent accounting and trans...
Disciplinary proportionality requires penalties for Authorised Representative misconduct to match proven harm, leading to reconsideration of registrat...
The appellant, an industry-specific body registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926, conducted seminars and workshops for its members. The CESTAT held that the appellant was engaged in Club or Association services, exempt from service tax under the principle of mutuality. Relying on Supreme Court decisions, the CESTAT ruled that the appellant, being constituted under law, was not included in the service tax net for Club or Association services prior to July 1, 2012. Consequently, the delegation fees charged by the appellant for seminars/workshops did not attract service tax under Convention Services. The demand for service tax was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
The appellant, an industry-specific body registered under the Trade Union Act, 1926, conducted seminars and workshops for its members. The CESTAT held that the appellant was engaged in Club or Association services, exempt from service tax under the principle of mutuality. Relying on Supreme Court decisions, the CESTAT ruled that the appellant, being constituted under law, was not included in the service tax net for Club or Association services prior to July 1, 2012. Consequently, the delegation fees charged by the appellant for seminars/workshops did not attract service tax under Convention Services. The demand for service tax was set aside, and the appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4918 
