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 allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudged service tax demands against the appellant. The Tribunal held that construction services provided to SEZ developers/units are exempt from service tax under Section 26 of the SEZ Act, 2005, which has overriding effect over other laws including the Finance Act, 1994. Non-production of Forms A-1 and A-2 or non-fulfillment of conditions prescribed in departmental notifications cannot deny this exemption. The Tribunal relied on precedents establishing that SEZ exemptions are standalone and not subject to procedural requirements under other laws. Article 265 of the Constitution prohibits tax levy without legal authority, and since SEZ Act provides complete exemption framework, additional conditions from exemption notifications are inapplicable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the adjudged service tax demands against the appellant. The Tribunal held that construction services provided to SEZ developers/units are exempt from service tax under Section 26 of the SEZ Act, 2005, which has overriding effect over other laws including the Finance Act, 1994. Non-production of Forms A-1 and A-2 or non-fulfillment of conditions prescribed in departmental notifications cannot deny this exemption. The Tribunal relied on precedents establishing that SEZ exemptions are standalone and not subject to procedural requirements under other laws. Article 265 of the Constitution prohibits tax levy without legal authority, and since SEZ Act provides complete exemption framework, additional conditions from exemption notifications are inapplicable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
