Incomplete BIS testing cannot justify reclassification or confiscatory action; declared customs classification restored and enhanced redemption fine s...
Page of 4819
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
3121 to 3140 of 96363 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving a business correspondent's tax liability. The tribunal held that the appellant was eligible for exemption under entry 29(g) for services provided to rural banking branches during 01.04.2015 to 30.06.2017. No short payment of service tax was found for services to Rajcomp Info Services Ltd. The extended period of limitation was deemed non-invocable, and most penalties were set aside, with only a Rs.10,000 penalty under Section 77(2) upheld for non-filing of service tax returns. The tribunal effectively reduced the original tax demand, finding the appellant's actions were in good faith and not intentionally evasive.
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving a business correspondent's tax liability. The tribunal held that the appellant was eligible for exemption under entry 29(g) for services provided to rural banking branches during 01.04.2015 to 30.06.2017. No short payment of service tax was found for services to Rajcomp Info Services Ltd. The extended period of limitation was deemed non-invocable, and most penalties were set aside, with only a Rs.10,000 penalty under Section 77(2) upheld for non-filing of service tax returns. The tribunal effectively reduced the original tax demand, finding the appellant's actions were in good faith and not intentionally evasive.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4819 
Join Channel 
