Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
TNMM functional comparability requires excluding rice manufacturers from a pure Basmati rice trader's benchmark and recognising operating export recei...
Working-capital adjustment subsumes delayed-receivable effects in TNMM benchmarking of captive software-development services, avoiding separate notion...
Transfer-pricing comparability requires exclusion of financially illogical super-profit comparables and correction of unsupported annual-report and ma...
Charitable character assessment preserves Section 80G approval despite inclusive spiritual teachings and incidental religious expenditure within the s...
Penalty proceedings for cash-loan acceptance require assessment proceedings and recorded Assessing Officer satisfaction; absent these, the proceedings...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving a 100% Export Oriented Unit's foreign transactions. The tribunal held that no service tax was leviable where the foreign bank and buyer were both located outside India, and the service was provided outside the taxable territory. The appellant was not considered the direct service recipient, and the charges were deemed part of sale terms rather than a taxable service. The tribunal found no direct transaction between the appellant and foreign service providers, rendering the service tax demand unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order and negating the service tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism.
CESTAT adjudicated a service tax dispute involving a 100% Export Oriented Unit's foreign transactions. The tribunal held that no service tax was leviable where the foreign bank and buyer were both located outside India, and the service was provided outside the taxable territory. The appellant was not considered the direct service recipient, and the charges were deemed part of sale terms rather than a taxable service. The tribunal found no direct transaction between the appellant and foreign service providers, rendering the service tax demand unsustainable. Consequently, the appeal was allowed, setting aside the original order and negating the service tax liability under the reverse charge mechanism.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.