Customs Broker association membership becomes mandatory in the operating jurisdiction, with exclusive membership and limited compliance-time relaxatio...
CESTAT adjudicated a tax dispute involving Cenvat Credit claims on mutual fund transactions. The tribunal held that investment in mutual fund units does not constitute a service under section 65B(44), thus invalidating the tax demand. The court found no trading of securities and rejected the revenue's contention that the appellant provided exempted services. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, dismissed the revenue's appeal, and allowed the appellant's appeals (ST/30046/2021, ST/30344/2020, and ST/31076/2019). The penalty under section 78 was also set aside, as the appellant had already paid the entire amount with interest before the show cause notice was issued.
CESTAT adjudicated a tax dispute involving Cenvat Credit claims on mutual fund transactions. The tribunal held that investment in mutual fund units does not constitute a service under section 65B(44), thus invalidating the tax demand. The court found no trading of securities and rejected the revenue's contention that the appellant provided exempted services. Consequently, the tribunal set aside the Commissioner's order, dismissed the revenue's appeal, and allowed the appellant's appeals (ST/30046/2021, ST/30344/2020, and ST/31076/2019). The penalty under section 78 was also set aside, as the appellant had already paid the entire amount with interest before the show cause notice was issued.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
