Demand on renting of immovable property was held partly time-barred as extended limitation was invoked without proving suppression with intent to evade; the portion beyond normal period was set aside, while the normal-period tax was confirmed and no penalty was imposed since tax and interest were already paid. Demand on management/business consultancy under RCM was rejected for want of evidence linking foreign currency expenses to taxable services and as revenue-neutral; the entire demand (raised only under extended period) was set aside. Commission paid for selling tea abroad was held exempt under the relevant notification without territorial restriction; demand was set aside. Royalty/licence fee and other remittance-related demands were set aside for limitation and lack of findings/evidence. All penalties were quashed under Section 73(3). - CESTAT
Demand on renting of immovable property was held partly time-barred as extended limitation was invoked without proving suppression with intent to evade; the portion beyond normal period was set aside, while the normal-period tax was confirmed and no penalty was imposed since tax and interest were already paid. Demand on management/business consultancy under RCM was rejected for want of evidence linking foreign currency expenses to taxable services and as revenue-neutral; the entire demand (raised only under extended period) was set aside. Commission paid for selling tea abroad was held exempt under the relevant notification without territorial restriction; demand was set aside. Royalty/licence fee and other remittance-related demands were set aside for limitation and lack of findings/evidence. All penalties were quashed under Section 73(3). - CESTAT
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4824 
Join Channel 
