Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
Page of 4916
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
41 to 60 of 98302 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT ruled that liquidated damages/penalty charges collected by M/s. Gujarat Industries Power Company Limited from vendors/suppliers for contract breach do not constitute a declared service under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal consistently held that service tax demand on liquidated charges is unsustainable, specifically affirming that penalties for non-completion of contractual timelines are not taxable. The appeal was consequently allowed, exempting such penalty amounts from service tax liability.
CESTAT ruled that liquidated damages/penalty charges collected by M/s. Gujarat Industries Power Company Limited from vendors/suppliers for contract breach do not constitute a declared service under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal consistently held that service tax demand on liquidated charges is unsustainable, specifically affirming that penalties for non-completion of contractual timelines are not taxable. The appeal was consequently allowed, exempting such penalty amounts from service tax liability.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4916 
