Corporate guarantee valuation permits actual ascertainable commission while barring retroactive application and extended-period penalties for bona fid...
Proper-officer jurisdiction under UPGST penalty provisions upheld; participation on merits prevents bypassing the statutory appellate remedy through w...
Transitioned CENVAT credit may validly satisfy mandatory pre-deposit requirements for legacy service tax appeals through Electronic Credit Ledger debi...
Building-plan sanction charges require statutory authority; unauthorised fees and GST were quashed, while labour cess must follow prescribed collectio...
Pure-agent exclusion fails where hotel booking facilitators receive third-party services themselves, making entire customer consideration taxable as r...
Transfer pricing requires evidence for AMP transactions, functionally reliable comparables, and appropriate aggregation or Berry Ratio benchmarking me...
Revisionary jurisdiction cannot reopen share capital assessments where adequate inquiry supports a permissible view and no independent error is establ...
Page of 4794
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1 to 20 of 95872 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 held that the appellant's activity of purchasing cargo space (ocean and air) in bulk from shipping/airlines on a principal-to-principal basis and reselling such space to its customers does not fall within "Business Auxiliary Service" or "Business Support Service" under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the pre-01.07.2012 period. The Tribunal found no element of promotion, marketing, or agency for the shipping/airlines; the margin earned was a trading surplus from purchase and sale of space, not consideration for a taxable service. As the transactions were conclusively principal-to-principal, the service tax demand, along with interest and penalties imposed in the impugned orders, was held to be unsustainable and was set aside.
The CESTAT held that the appellant's activity of purchasing cargo space (ocean and air) in bulk from shipping/airlines on a principal-to-principal basis and reselling such space to its customers does not fall within "Business Auxiliary Service" or "Business Support Service" under Section 65 of the Finance Act, 1994 for the pre-01.07.2012 period. The Tribunal found no element of promotion, marketing, or agency for the shipping/airlines; the margin earned was a trading surplus from purchase and sale of space, not consideration for a taxable service. As the transactions were conclusively principal-to-principal, the service tax demand, along with interest and penalties imposed in the impugned orders, was held to be unsustainable and was set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
