Opportunity to furnish unsecured-loan confirmations is required before reassessment initiation; proceedings require fresh consideration after taxpayer...
Under-reporting on a first reassessment return attracts penalty, while enhanced misreporting penalty requires proof of a statutory misreporting catego...
The CESTAT held that the services provided by the appellant did not qualify as Online Information Data and Access Retrieval (OIDAR) services. The appellant performed activities like copyediting, typesetting, formatting, proofreading, graphic designing, indexing, and coding on data provided by a foreign entity, without owning or transferring the data. As the appellant did not provide access or retrieval of owned data, the services did not fall under OIDAR. The appellant's services qualified as exports, entitling them to a refund u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the services provided by the appellant did not qualify as Online Information Data and Access Retrieval (OIDAR) services. The appellant performed activities like copyediting, typesetting, formatting, proofreading, graphic designing, indexing, and coding on data provided by a foreign entity, without owning or transferring the data. As the appellant did not provide access or retrieval of owned data, the services did not fall under OIDAR. The appellant's services qualified as exports, entitling them to a refund u/r 5 of the CENVAT Credit Rules. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.