Export obligation removed by notification, customs duty demand invalidated; penalties under s.112 and s.114AA quashed due to inadmissible s.108 statem...
Customs officers must wear and use department-issued body-worn cameras when clearing passenger baggage, with daily secure transfer and 30-day retentio...
Page of 4828
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
10041 to 10060 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 held that the show-cause notice issued by the JC, CGST, Daman was valid because the registered office formed part of the factory's common business activity and its expenses were not separately accounted; any service-tax liability for that office would be payable by the factory. However, on merits the Tribunal concluded that the transfer/assignment of tenancy and occupancy rights in respect of the immovable property in Mumbai does not fall within the definition of "service" under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994, and amounts received for such transfer are not liable to service tax. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside; extended limitation not adjudicated.
CESTAT held that the show-cause notice issued by the JC, CGST, Daman was valid because the registered office formed part of the factory's common business activity and its expenses were not separately accounted; any service-tax liability for that office would be payable by the factory. However, on merits the Tribunal concluded that the transfer/assignment of tenancy and occupancy rights in respect of the immovable property in Mumbai does not fall within the definition of "service" under Section 65B(44) of the Finance Act, 1994, and amounts received for such transfer are not liable to service tax. The appeal is allowed and the impugned order is set aside; extended limitation not adjudicated.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
