Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
701 to 720 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
The CESTAT held that the extended period of limitation invoked for levying service tax was unsustainable as there was no wilful suppression of facts by the appellant. The demands of Rs.1,01,6,502/- under 'sponsorship' services, Rs.13,30,558/- on inter-company expenses, and Rs.20,371/- as interest were set aside. For renting services, the demand of Rs.2,45,58,483/- was set aside, and the appellant was directed to produce evidence for the remaining Rs.34,29,130/-. The demands of Rs.73,00,732/- for import of services and Rs.2,80,40,921/- for software licenses were remanded for de-novo adjudication to determine the appellant's role and liabilities. The penalties were also set aside. The appeal was disposed of accordingly.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.