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 partially allowed the appeal concerning service tax demand for 2014-15. The tribunal held that for the period March 2014 to September 2014, the demand was barred by limitation as the show cause notice exceeded the 5-year period. For October 2014 to March 2015, the show cause notice was deemed valid, considering COVID-19 related limitation extensions. The tribunal remanded the matter to the Original Authority for re-determining tax liability, considering that only 50% service tax was payable by the appellant. Penalty under Section 78 was set aside due to advocate's ignorance, and late fees were reduced to Rs. 10,000. The service tax demand based on Income Tax data was found sustainable and valid.
CESTAT partially allowed the appeal concerning service tax demand for 2014-15. The tribunal held that for the period March 2014 to September 2014, the demand was barred by limitation as the show cause notice exceeded the 5-year period. For October 2014 to March 2015, the show cause notice was deemed valid, considering COVID-19 related limitation extensions. The tribunal remanded the matter to the Original Authority for re-determining tax liability, considering that only 50% service tax was payable by the appellant. Penalty under Section 78 was set aside due to advocate's ignorance, and late fees were reduced to Rs. 10,000. The service tax demand based on Income Tax data was found sustainable and valid.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
