Fake-invoice penalties remain available where taxpayer admissions and records establish unsupported input tax credit claims and false GST documentatio...
Works contract classification applies to permanently installed fire-protection systems, while earthwork and obsolete IGST concessions remain unavailab...
Professional fee recovery for GST refund representation succeeds where direct engagement, fee acknowledgement, and authority are established despite c...
Transfer pricing of intra-group support services requires prescribed benchmarking; unsupported nil valuation and alternate business-expense disallowan...
CESTAT ruled that a state university's arrangement with Learning Centers (LCs) and Regional Centers (RCs) for distance education programs did not constitute taxable franchise services. The university maintained core control over admissions, curriculum, examinations, and degree conferral, while LCs/RCs provided teaching and operational support. The revenue-sharing arrangement, where LCs/RCs received percentages of collected fees, demonstrated they were service providers to the university rather than franchise recipients. The Tribunal determined these were education-related services falling under the Negative List and exempt under Notification No. 25/2012-ST and 6/2014-ST. The university's use of its name by LCs/RCs did not qualify as trademark or franchise rights under ejusdem generis principles. Appeal allowed with full relief from service tax liability.
CESTAT ruled that a state university's arrangement with Learning Centers (LCs) and Regional Centers (RCs) for distance education programs did not constitute taxable franchise services. The university maintained core control over admissions, curriculum, examinations, and degree conferral, while LCs/RCs provided teaching and operational support. The revenue-sharing arrangement, where LCs/RCs received percentages of collected fees, demonstrated they were service providers to the university rather than franchise recipients. The Tribunal determined these were education-related services falling under the Negative List and exempt under Notification No. 25/2012-ST and 6/2014-ST. The university's use of its name by LCs/RCs did not qualify as trademark or franchise rights under ejusdem generis principles. Appeal allowed with full relief from service tax liability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
