ESOP expenditure allowed as FMV difference; long-term capital gain issue sent back for collector rate determination; deferred income additions disallo...
Appeal allowed; impugned order quashed as regulator failed to prove nexus or manipulative scheme; sale genuine - s.12A(a)-(c), Regs 3(a)-(d),4(1),4(2)...
Appellant's ring-back tone service held OIDAR, taxable domestically for 01.07.2012-31.07.2016; liability confirmed, penalties vacated, remanded for re...
The AT held that, following consideration of the DGAP report and documentary verification, the DGAP's methodology for apportioning ITC to project costs was appropriate and captured the economic effect of GST implementation. The Tribunal found that no reduction in GST rate nor incremental benefit of Input Tax Credit accrued to the Respondent in respect of the three impugned projects; accordingly, the requirements of Section 171 of the CGST Act are not attracted. Proceedings against the Respondent in relation to those projects were dismissed and the application disposed of.
The AT held that, following consideration of the DGAP report and documentary verification, the DGAP's methodology for apportioning ITC to project costs was appropriate and captured the economic effect of GST implementation. The Tribunal found that no reduction in GST rate nor incremental benefit of Input Tax Credit accrued to the Respondent in respect of the three impugned projects; accordingly, the requirements of Section 171 of the CGST Act are not attracted. Proceedings against the Respondent in relation to those projects were dismissed and the application disposed of.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
