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...
Functional comparability governs software-service benchmarking: dissimilar companies are excluded, while related-party filters, margins and working-ca...
CESTAT held that the appellant's claim of exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST fails because the recipient was a state government company and not a statutory authority created by statute; therefore the notification is inapplicable. The Tribunal affirmed invocation of the extended period of limitation, finding no complex questions and noting prior judicial determination of the recipient's status and contemporaneous evidence that service tax was paid only from October 2013, establishing intent to short-pay/evade tax. Penalty under section 78 was upheld; challenges to penalties under section 77(1)(a) and late fee under section 77(2) were not pursued. The appeal was dismissed.
CESTAT held that the appellant's claim of exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST fails because the recipient was a state government company and not a statutory authority created by statute; therefore the notification is inapplicable. The Tribunal affirmed invocation of the extended period of limitation, finding no complex questions and noting prior judicial determination of the recipient's status and contemporaneous evidence that service tax was paid only from October 2013, establishing intent to short-pay/evade tax. Penalty under section 78 was upheld; challenges to penalties under section 77(1)(a) and late fee under section 77(2) were not pursued. The appeal was dismissed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4830 
Join Channel 
