Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT held that service tax demand against an advocate was improperly raised. The tribunal found no justification for confirming tax liability on professional fees and rental income, as both the adjudicating authority and appellate authority had previously dropped respective demands. The department failed to produce evidence for extended limitation period, and the appellant had consistently filed returns. Critically, rental income from residential property remains exempt from service tax even when rented to a business entity. The tribunal ruled the impugned order unsustainable and allowed the appeal, effectively quashing the service tax demand against the advocate.
CESTAT held that service tax demand against an advocate was improperly raised. The tribunal found no justification for confirming tax liability on professional fees and rental income, as both the adjudicating authority and appellate authority had previously dropped respective demands. The department failed to produce evidence for extended limitation period, and the appellant had consistently filed returns. Critically, rental income from residential property remains exempt from service tax even when rented to a business entity. The tribunal ruled the impugned order unsustainable and allowed the appeal, effectively quashing the service tax demand against the advocate.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
