Form 26AS evidence requires successor-entity accounting verification after business transfer, while invoice-supported related-party advertising expend...
Money-laundering judgment timing requires awaiting the scheduled-offence decision despite continuation of the underlying trial where outcomes directly...
Accredited investor eligibility expands through securities-market exposure, while alternative investment fund disputes require prescribed resolution a...
CESTAT affirms that, having upheld the service tax demand, interest under Section 75 of the FA is automatically chargeable and the Appellant must pay appropriate interest for belated utilization of input service credit. Conversely, invocation of the extended period under the proviso and imposition of mandatory penalty under Section 78(1) of the FA are set aside: the Tribunal finds no positive act of wilful suppression or misstatement, the valuation issue arose from bona fide legal interpretation, revised returns were filed pre-order, and the extended period is unjustified. The O-in-O is modified accordingly; appeal allowed in part.
CESTAT affirms that, having upheld the service tax demand, interest under Section 75 of the FA is automatically chargeable and the Appellant must pay appropriate interest for belated utilization of input service credit. Conversely, invocation of the extended period under the proviso and imposition of mandatory penalty under Section 78(1) of the FA are set aside: the Tribunal finds no positive act of wilful suppression or misstatement, the valuation issue arose from bona fide legal interpretation, revised returns were filed pre-order, and the extended period is unjustified. The O-in-O is modified accordingly; appeal allowed in part.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4915 
