Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be classified as intermediary services for the period July 2012 to March 2014. As per Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, the place of provision was the location of the service recipient outside India. Since payment was received in convertible foreign exchange, the services qualified as export of services u/r 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, no service tax was leviable, and the demand was set aside. The appeal was allowed.
The CESTAT held that the appellant's services could not be classified as intermediary services for the period July 2012 to March 2014. As per Rule 3 of the Place of Provision of Services Rules, the place of provision was the location of the service recipient outside India. Since payment was received in convertible foreign exchange, the services qualified as export of services u/r 6 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, no service tax was leviable, and the demand was set aside. The appeal was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
