Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
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.