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 appellant's service tax liability and Cenvat credit eligibility. Court held appellants were not providing branded services to subscribers, qualifying them for exemption under Notification 33/2012-ST. Extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, resulting in demand restriction to normal limitation period and cancellation of Section 78 penalties. Regarding Cenvat credit, appellants entitled to credit of service tax paid by MSO, subject to Cenvat Credit Rules compliance, specifically the one-year time limit from document submission. Credits claimed beyond prescribed period were denied, following established precedent. Matter remanded to Original Authority for demand re-quantification, with appeals partially allowed.
CESTAT determined appellant's service tax liability and Cenvat credit eligibility. Court held appellants were not providing branded services to subscribers, qualifying them for exemption under Notification 33/2012-ST. Extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable, resulting in demand restriction to normal limitation period and cancellation of Section 78 penalties. Regarding Cenvat credit, appellants entitled to credit of service tax paid by MSO, subject to Cenvat Credit Rules compliance, specifically the one-year time limit from document submission. Credits claimed beyond prescribed period were denied, following established precedent. Matter remanded to Original Authority for demand re-quantification, with appeals partially allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.