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 
of 4807
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
