Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT determined that providing infrastructure and support services to educational institutions like IIM and XLRI does not constitute commercial training and coaching services subject to service tax. The appellants' role was limited to facilitating classes through infrastructure maintenance, marketing programs, and examination support, while the institutions maintained control over pedagogy, course design, and certification. Unlike typical coaching centers, appellants were integrated with degree-awarding institutions through revenue-sharing agreements. The tribunal held these were auxiliary educational support services qualifying for exemption, not commercial coaching services. The Commissioner's contradictory findings regarding service classification were rejected, and the appeal was allowed on grounds that infrastructure support to recognized educational institutions falls under exempt services.
CESTAT determined that providing infrastructure and support services to educational institutions like IIM and XLRI does not constitute commercial training and coaching services subject to service tax. The appellants' role was limited to facilitating classes through infrastructure maintenance, marketing programs, and examination support, while the institutions maintained control over pedagogy, course design, and certification. Unlike typical coaching centers, appellants were integrated with degree-awarding institutions through revenue-sharing agreements. The tribunal held these were auxiliary educational support services qualifying for exemption, not commercial coaching services. The Commissioner's contradictory findings regarding service classification were rejected, and the appeal was allowed on grounds that infrastructure support to recognized educational institutions falls under exempt services.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.