Promissory note presumption of consideration survives blank-signature and income-tax non-disclosure objections when admissions and attesting evidence ...
Charitable registration cancellation: limitation and jurisdiction upheld, but withdrawal quashed under discontinued provisions for skill-development e...
Page of 4803
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1421 to 1440 of 96047 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The AAR ruled that Logskim's stipend disbursement to trainees does not qualify as a "pure agent" service under Rule 33 of CGST Rules, as they merely act as a conduit without procuring supplies or making payments to third parties. The authority found that Logskim failed to meet key conditions of Rule 33, particularly clauses (i) and (iii). Similarly, the sale of uniforms, shoes, and insurance premiums to industry partners, even at cost without markup, is taxable since "reimbursement at actuals" alone doesn't establish pure agent status. The AAR concluded that both the stipend amounts received and passed to trainees and the sale of items to industry partners are chargeable to tax under CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017.
The AAR ruled that Logskim's stipend disbursement to trainees does not qualify as a "pure agent" service under Rule 33 of CGST Rules, as they merely act as a conduit without procuring supplies or making payments to third parties. The authority found that Logskim failed to meet key conditions of Rule 33, particularly clauses (i) and (iii). Similarly, the sale of uniforms, shoes, and insurance premiums to industry partners, even at cost without markup, is taxable since "reimbursement at actuals" alone doesn't establish pure agent status. The AAR concluded that both the stipend amounts received and passed to trainees and the sale of items to industry partners are chargeable to tax under CGST/TNGST Acts, 2017.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.