Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside service tax demands for 2014-15 and 2016-17. The tribunal found no evidence of trade discounts not being passed to customers and accepted the appellant's proportionate credit reversal under Rule 6(3)(i) of CCR. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to absence of tax evasion, and mandatory penalties were consequently set aside. The key determination was that the appellant had correctly paid service tax on value addition and reversed credits appropriately, rendering the department's demands unsustainable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside service tax demands for 2014-15 and 2016-17. The tribunal found no evidence of trade discounts not being passed to customers and accepted the appellant's proportionate credit reversal under Rule 6(3)(i) of CCR. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable due to absence of tax evasion, and mandatory penalties were consequently set aside. The key determination was that the appellant had correctly paid service tax on value addition and reversed credits appropriately, rendering the department's demands unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.