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" ?
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that reimbursements and expenses incurred by the service provider for goods, software and ancillary services procured and charged separately to the associated enterprise do not constitute taxable "gross amount charged" or consideration for the taxable service. Under the parties' Master Service Agreement, the recipient was to procure material/ERP and reimburse allocated costs; such reimbursements-accounted as sundry creditors and adjusted against receivables-were not additional consideration and were not paid as service charges. Consequently those amounts could not be included in service tax invoices nor added to the taxable value under Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, and the demands were unsustainable.
The CESTAT allowed the appeal, holding that reimbursements and expenses incurred by the service provider for goods, software and ancillary services procured and charged separately to the associated enterprise do not constitute taxable "gross amount charged" or consideration for the taxable service. Under the parties' Master Service Agreement, the recipient was to procure material/ERP and reimburse allocated costs; such reimbursements-accounted as sundry creditors and adjusted against receivables-were not additional consideration and were not paid as service charges. Consequently those amounts could not be included in service tax invoices nor added to the taxable value under Rule 4A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, and the demands were unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.