Validity of faceless assessment procedure challenged for jurisdictional AO intervention mid-remand, resulting in quashing of assessment for procedural...
Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Invoices that expressly showed service tax separately preclude claiming cum-tax valuation under Section 67(2); non-payment of tax by the tenant did not absolve the supplier, who remained liable to discharge tax on the gross invoice amount and interest, while recovery should have been pursued by debit/credit note or other lawful means. The appellant's pre-show-cause payment of duty with interest and demonstrated bonafide financial difficulty warranted discretionary relief: the adjudicated duty and interest were sustained but the balance penalty was set aside under the statutory relief provision (Section 80).
Invoices that expressly showed service tax separately preclude claiming cum-tax valuation under Section 67(2); non-payment of tax by the tenant did not absolve the supplier, who remained liable to discharge tax on the gross invoice amount and interest, while recovery should have been pursued by debit/credit note or other lawful means. The appellant's pre-show-cause payment of duty with interest and demonstrated bonafide financial difficulty warranted discretionary relief: the adjudicated duty and interest were sustained but the balance penalty was set aside under the statutory relief provision (Section 80).
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
