Fraudulently obtained SEIS scrips cannot support customs exemption; recovery, confiscation and penalties were sustained, but employee penalty fell awa...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5081 to 5100 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
The note addresses VCES eligibility where pre- and post-July 2012 liability arise from different legal questions: whether the appellant rendered an intellectual property service before July 2012 versus whether permitting Hallmarking/Assaying Centres to administer the BIS scheme for royalty constituted a 'service' after July 2012 under the post-July 2012 definition. It concludes that the issues are distinct, so the identical-issue proviso to the VCES does not bar acceptance of the later declaration; reliance on prior notices about intellectual property services did not preclude voluntary compliance for the separate charge based on the broader post-July 2012 service definition.
The note addresses VCES eligibility where pre- and post-July 2012 liability arise from different legal questions: whether the appellant rendered an intellectual property service before July 2012 versus whether permitting Hallmarking/Assaying Centres to administer the BIS scheme for royalty constituted a 'service' after July 2012 under the post-July 2012 definition. It concludes that the issues are distinct, so the identical-issue proviso to the VCES does not bar acceptance of the later declaration; reliance on prior notices about intellectual property services did not preclude voluntary compliance for the separate charge based on the broader post-July 2012 service definition.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4813 
Join Channel 
