Business expenditure deduction requires proof of genuine commission payments and commercial allowability; turnover growth alone cannot validate the cl...
Article 8 treaty coverage excluded third-party airline support services, while documented demonetisation cash receipts remained accepted business inco...
Functional comparability under TNMM requires highway contract benchmarks to reflect operation, maintenance and transfer activities, requiring fresh be...
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 
of 4803
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
