Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4798
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
341 to 360 of 95957 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.