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" ?
The CESTAT allowed the appellant's appeal against recovery of service tax, interest, and penalties. The Tribunal found that the appellant received amounts below the threshold limit prescribed under Notification No. 33/2012, which exempted certain eatable products from service tax liability. The appellant's belief that no service tax was payable was deemed reasonable and supported by the Kwality Ice Cream Company precedent. The Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked for making the demand, rendering it time-barred. Consequently, no penalty could be imposed on the appellant. The impugned order was set aside in its entirety.
The CESTAT allowed the appellant's appeal against recovery of service tax, interest, and penalties. The Tribunal found that the appellant received amounts below the threshold limit prescribed under Notification No. 33/2012, which exempted certain eatable products from service tax liability. The appellant's belief that no service tax was payable was deemed reasonable and supported by the Kwality Ice Cream Company precedent. The Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked for making the demand, rendering it time-barred. Consequently, no penalty could be imposed on the appellant. The impugned order was set aside in its entirety.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.