Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
HC held that services supplied by petitioner to a foreign entity constitute "export of services" under Section 2(6) IGST Act, as consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange and supplier and recipient are separate legal entities, not mere establishments of distinct persons. Applying the principle of substance over form, the Court held that the nature of services and contractual terms do not make petitioner an "intermediary" and the place of supply is outside India under Section 13(2) IGST Act. Notification No. 04/2019-Integrated Tax was found inapplicable, being confined to pharmaceutical R&D, unlike petitioner's activities. The refund rejection order and show cause notices were quashed, and petitioner's claim for refund of unutilized ITC was allowed.
HC held that services supplied by petitioner to a foreign entity constitute "export of services" under Section 2(6) IGST Act, as consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange and supplier and recipient are separate legal entities, not mere establishments of distinct persons. Applying the principle of substance over form, the Court held that the nature of services and contractual terms do not make petitioner an "intermediary" and the place of supply is outside India under Section 13(2) IGST Act. Notification No. 04/2019-Integrated Tax was found inapplicable, being confined to pharmaceutical R&D, unlike petitioner's activities. The refund rejection order and show cause notices were quashed, and petitioner's claim for refund of unutilized ITC was allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.