Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
CESTAT allowed appeal concerning CENVAT credit on input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal held that sales promotion and brand building services maintained direct nexus with manufacturing, qualifying for CENVAT credit. Extended limitation period was inapplicable as case involved interpretational issues of complex legal provisions. Penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 15 was invalid absent fraud or willful misstatement. Interest under Rule 14 and Section 11AA was not chargeable as conditions for erroneous credit availment were unmet. Tribunal set aside demands, interest, and penalties, noting ER-1 Returns format required only total CENVAT credit reflection, not category-wise breakdown.
CESTAT allowed appeal concerning CENVAT credit on input services under Rule 2(l) of CENVAT Credit Rules, 2004. Tribunal held that sales promotion and brand building services maintained direct nexus with manufacturing, qualifying for CENVAT credit. Extended limitation period was inapplicable as case involved interpretational issues of complex legal provisions. Penalty under Section 11AC and Rule 15 was invalid absent fraud or willful misstatement. Interest under Rule 14 and Section 11AA was not chargeable as conditions for erroneous credit availment were unmet. Tribunal set aside demands, interest, and penalties, noting ER-1 Returns format required only total CENVAT credit reflection, not category-wise breakdown.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.