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 service-tax demand and penalty. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authority failed to furnish reasoned findings that the appellant's receipts of anti-virus software from foreign suppliers constituted taxable ITSS services or involved transfer of a right to use; the contractual matrix showed no EULA between the appellant and foreign vendors and the right to use was conferred to end-users. Precedents relied upon by revenue were distinguished on the facts. Given admitted over-payment resulting in revenue neutrality and absence of deliberate suppression or mala fides, the extended limitation period and imposition of penalty were held inapplicable.
CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned service-tax demand and penalty. The Tribunal found the adjudicating authority failed to furnish reasoned findings that the appellant's receipts of anti-virus software from foreign suppliers constituted taxable ITSS services or involved transfer of a right to use; the contractual matrix showed no EULA between the appellant and foreign vendors and the right to use was conferred to end-users. Precedents relied upon by revenue were distinguished on the facts. Given admitted over-payment resulting in revenue neutrality and absence of deliberate suppression or mala fides, the extended limitation period and imposition of penalty were held inapplicable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.