Transfer-pricing treatment of ITeS margins excludes pass-through tax recoveries and separate delayed-receivables interest after working-capital adjust...
Capacity-utilisation adjustments under TNMM can neutralise substantiated COVID-related idle costs where underutilisation materially affects profitabil...
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...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
161 to 180 of 96556 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand for service tax on facilitation charges paid by the Appellant to a related generator. The Tribunal held that the generator's production of electricity constituted "manufacture" and, during the relevant period, electricity qualified as "goods" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act; manufacture was expressly excluded from the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service," hence the charges were not exigible to service tax. Consequential demands for interest and penalties were held untenable because the primary demand was unsustainable. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected as departmental awareness of the cogeneration arrangement precluded extended limitation. Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand for service tax on facilitation charges paid by the Appellant to a related generator. The Tribunal held that the generator's production of electricity constituted "manufacture" and, during the relevant period, electricity qualified as "goods" under Section 2(f) of the Central Excise Act; manufacture was expressly excluded from the definition of "Business Auxiliary Service," hence the charges were not exigible to service tax. Consequential demands for interest and penalties were held untenable because the primary demand was unsustainable. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected as departmental awareness of the cogeneration arrangement precluded extended limitation. Appeal allowed; impugned order set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.