Cases where this provision is explicitly mentioned in the judgment/order text; may not be exhaustive. To view the complete list of cases mentioning this section, Click here.
Provisions expressly mentioned in the judgment/order text.
CESTAT upheld service tax demands against an Indian IT company regarding manpower recruitment services, business auxiliary services, and business support services. The Tribunal determined that under Section 66A of Finance Act 1994, services received from foreign providers were taxable in India based on the recipient's location, regardless of where services were consumed. The company's liaison office in USA was deemed an extended arm of the Indian entity. The Tribunal confirmed tax liability on payments to US-based contractors for IT services and upheld referral fees/commission payments to overseas service providers. Extended period of limitation and penalties were maintained due to the company's failure to disclose relevant information promptly during audit. Appeals dismissed with tax demands, interest and penalties confirmed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.