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...
Employee stock-shortage penalties do not constitute consideration for services, preventing GST collection under Schedule II in employment relationship...
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.