Admissibility of electronic evidence bars undervaluation demands where printouts, retracted statements and no cross-examination leave the case unprove...
Limitation in oppression and mismanagement proceedings: prior knowledge of removal and dilution barred the challenge, with valuation directions upheld...
Insolvency professional agency governance rules amended to add nominee directors, tighten independent director eligibility, and regulate managing dire...
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 4821 
Join Channel 
