Concessional Basic Customs Duty on Ethernet switches: classification as enterprise switches upheld, challenge dismissed for lack of substantial law qu...
Insolvency petition based on admitted debt and default upheld; challenge for malicious initiation rejected, settlement may proceed under resolution fr...
Quashing of FIR and challenge to ECIR over alleged diversion of funds and preferential ESOP pricing dismissed after prima facie money-laundering findi...
The AAR held that the applicant, a not-for-profit entity incorporated under the Companies Act, 1882 and presently governed by s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013, qualifies as a "company" and hence a "body corporate" under the Companies Act, 2013. It is neither a co-operative society nor a body corporate notified for exclusion. Consequently, for sponsorship services supplied by the applicant to recipients in the taxable territory, the applicant falls within the expression "body corporate" in the relevant GST notifications. Such sponsorship services do not fall under reverse charge; GST liability is to be discharged by the applicant on a forward charge basis.
The AAR held that the applicant, a not-for-profit entity incorporated under the Companies Act, 1882 and presently governed by s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013, qualifies as a "company" and hence a "body corporate" under the Companies Act, 2013. It is neither a co-operative society nor a body corporate notified for exclusion. Consequently, for sponsorship services supplied by the applicant to recipients in the taxable territory, the applicant falls within the expression "body corporate" in the relevant GST notifications. Such sponsorship services do not fall under reverse charge; GST liability is to be discharged by the applicant on a forward charge basis.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.