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 reimbursable expenses and business auxiliary services. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding no valid basis for service tax levy on reimbursable expenses, consistent with SC precedent. The department's attempt to demand tax based on profit and loss account entries without demonstrating actual service consideration was rejected. Additionally, the tribunal found no evidence of intentional tax evasion, thereby invalidating extended limitation period and penalties. The appeal was allowed, effectively quashing the original tax demands and establishing that mere accounting entries cannot constitute taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994.
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving reimbursable expenses and business auxiliary services. The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding no valid basis for service tax levy on reimbursable expenses, consistent with SC precedent. The department's attempt to demand tax based on profit and loss account entries without demonstrating actual service consideration was rejected. Additionally, the tribunal found no evidence of intentional tax evasion, thereby invalidating extended limitation period and penalties. The appeal was allowed, effectively quashing the original tax demands and establishing that mere accounting entries cannot constitute taxable service under the Finance Act, 1994.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
