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 and set aside service tax demand against job-worker appellant engaged in pickling and oiling of HR coils for principal manufacturers during 2007-2015. Though activities constituted taxable Business Auxiliary Services under sub-clause (v), appellant was exempt under Notification 8/2005-Service Tax dated 01.03.2005 as amended, since raw materials were supplied by clients and processed goods returned to them for manufacturing excisable goods. Post-March 2012, Chapter Note 6 to Chapter 72 of CETA deemed pickling and oiling as manufacturing process attracting central excise duty, precluding service tax liability to avoid double taxation. Principal manufacturers had certified compliance with excise duty obligations. The tribunal concluded no service tax liability existed for the entire disputed period and allowed complete relief to appellant.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside service tax demand against job-worker appellant engaged in pickling and oiling of HR coils for principal manufacturers during 2007-2015. Though activities constituted taxable Business Auxiliary Services under sub-clause (v), appellant was exempt under Notification 8/2005-Service Tax dated 01.03.2005 as amended, since raw materials were supplied by clients and processed goods returned to them for manufacturing excisable goods. Post-March 2012, Chapter Note 6 to Chapter 72 of CETA deemed pickling and oiling as manufacturing process attracting central excise duty, precluding service tax liability to avoid double taxation. Principal manufacturers had certified compliance with excise duty obligations. The tribunal concluded no service tax liability existed for the entire disputed period and allowed complete relief to appellant.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
