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 held that an Amway distributor is liable for service tax on commission received from sales group performance, categorizing it as Business Auxiliary Service. The tribunal upheld service tax demand while granting cum-duty benefits and rejecting extended limitation period of 5 years. The court recognized the distributor's lack of intentional tax evasion and set aside penalties under Sections 78 and 77. The appeal was partially allowed, modifying the original order to reflect these nuanced determinations regarding service tax liability and procedural considerations.
CESTAT held that an Amway distributor is liable for service tax on commission received from sales group performance, categorizing it as Business Auxiliary Service. The tribunal upheld service tax demand while granting cum-duty benefits and rejecting extended limitation period of 5 years. The court recognized the distributor's lack of intentional tax evasion and set aside penalties under Sections 78 and 77. The appeal was partially allowed, modifying the original order to reflect these nuanced determinations regarding service tax liability and procedural considerations.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.