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 ruled that free diesel provided to service provider M/s. R.K. Carriers should not be included in the taxable value for service tax computation, following the Supreme Court's decision in Bhayana Builders which established that free supplies do not constitute non-monetary consideration. The Tribunal clarified that Notification No. 12/2003-ST is inapplicable as it only covers goods sold by service providers, not free supplies from recipients. Regarding exemption under Notification No. 34/2004-ST, CESTAT determined that Clause (ii) applies to appellant but remanded the matter to Original Adjudicating Authorities for proper quantification of differential duty. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
CESTAT ruled that free diesel provided to service provider M/s. R.K. Carriers should not be included in the taxable value for service tax computation, following the Supreme Court's decision in Bhayana Builders which established that free supplies do not constitute non-monetary consideration. The Tribunal clarified that Notification No. 12/2003-ST is inapplicable as it only covers goods sold by service providers, not free supplies from recipients. Regarding exemption under Notification No. 34/2004-ST, CESTAT determined that Clause (ii) applies to appellant but remanded the matter to Original Adjudicating Authorities for proper quantification of differential duty. Appeal allowed by way of remand.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
