Capital reduction is distinct from share buy-back, preventing buy-back tax; restructuring interest and related business deductions also survive scruti...
Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Page of 4809
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1341 to 1360 of 96174 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
AAR held that Minimum Guaranteed Off-take (MGO) charges constitute liquidated damages and do not amount to a "supply" or "consideration" under the CGST framework. Applying the definition of declared services in Schedule II(5)(e) and the Contract Act principles, the Authority found no requisite nexus between the payment and any obligational supply (i.e., agreeing to do, refrain or tolerate an act). MGO payments merely compensate for breach and are a monetary flow for loss, not the object of a contract; consequently they fall outside Section 7(1A)/Schedule II coverage and are not taxable under GST, particularly where the principal product supplied is outside GST ambit.
AAR held that Minimum Guaranteed Off-take (MGO) charges constitute liquidated damages and do not amount to a "supply" or "consideration" under the CGST framework. Applying the definition of declared services in Schedule II(5)(e) and the Contract Act principles, the Authority found no requisite nexus between the payment and any obligational supply (i.e., agreeing to do, refrain or tolerate an act). MGO payments merely compensate for breach and are a monetary flow for loss, not the object of a contract; consequently they fall outside Section 7(1A)/Schedule II coverage and are not taxable under GST, particularly where the principal product supplied is outside GST ambit.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.