Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT partially allowed the appellant's appeal against service tax demands. The Tribunal remanded the technical inspection service tax calculation for recomputation, recognizing excess payments had been ignored. It held that written-off advances cannot attract service tax, services rendered by appellant's Japan branch to an Indian client were subject to reverse charge mechanism, and electricity charges collected as a pure agent were not taxable. The demand for maintenance charges was appropriated against tax already paid. The extended limitation period was invalidated as no suppression of facts was established. The appeal was disposed of by remanding calculation issues to the adjudicating authority for verification based on the CA certificate.
CESTAT partially allowed the appellant's appeal against service tax demands. The Tribunal remanded the technical inspection service tax calculation for recomputation, recognizing excess payments had been ignored. It held that written-off advances cannot attract service tax, services rendered by appellant's Japan branch to an Indian client were subject to reverse charge mechanism, and electricity charges collected as a pure agent were not taxable. The demand for maintenance charges was appropriated against tax already paid. The extended limitation period was invalidated as no suppression of facts was established. The appeal was disposed of by remanding calculation issues to the adjudicating authority for verification based on the CA certificate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
