Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT allowed the appeal by appellant banks and set aside the adjudged service tax demands, interest and penalties in the impugned order dated 28.02.2017. The Tribunal held that charges levied by foreign correspondent/intermediary banks in export-related remittance and document-transfer transactions do not attract service tax on a reverse charge mechanism basis where Indian banks act for client exporters, and confirmed that liability under RCM is unsustainable. Relying on coordinate-bench reasoning, the Tribunal found no legal basis to treat Indian banks as recipients of taxable services rendered by foreign banks in such export settlements, and therefore quashed the departmental demand and related consequential penalties.
CESTAT allowed the appeal by appellant banks and set aside the adjudged service tax demands, interest and penalties in the impugned order dated 28.02.2017. The Tribunal held that charges levied by foreign correspondent/intermediary banks in export-related remittance and document-transfer transactions do not attract service tax on a reverse charge mechanism basis where Indian banks act for client exporters, and confirmed that liability under RCM is unsustainable. Relying on coordinate-bench reasoning, the Tribunal found no legal basis to treat Indian banks as recipients of taxable services rendered by foreign banks in such export settlements, and therefore quashed the departmental demand and related consequential penalties.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
