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...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Automated Free Sale and Commerce Certificates enable paperless processing while retaining risk-based manual verification for selected exporter applica...
Page of 4830
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96587 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The CESTAT held that remuneration paid to whole-time directors constitutes salary for services rendered and is not subject to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994, provided it is taxed as salary under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The tribunal noted the adjudicating authority failed to consider relevant precedents and the principle that salary remuneration excludes service tax liability. The impugned order was set aside due to non-verification of Income Tax assessment treating the payments as salary. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration in light of these principles and to ensure the disputed remuneration is liable to income tax as salary. The appeal was allowed by remand, directing adherence to judicially settled law and statutory provisions under the Companies Act, 2013.
The CESTAT held that remuneration paid to whole-time directors constitutes salary for services rendered and is not subject to service tax under the Finance Act, 1994, provided it is taxed as salary under the Income-tax Act, 1961. The tribunal noted the adjudicating authority failed to consider relevant precedents and the principle that salary remuneration excludes service tax liability. The impugned order was set aside due to non-verification of Income Tax assessment treating the payments as salary. The matter was remanded to the original adjudicating authority for fresh consideration in light of these principles and to ensure the disputed remuneration is liable to income tax as salary. The appeal was allowed by remand, directing adherence to judicially settled law and statutory provisions under the Companies Act, 2013.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.