Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
TDS on leave fare concession payments was disputed where the assessee bank had treated the benefit as exempt, but employees had undertaken foreign-leg journeys. Although the substantive exemption under section 10(5) was found against the assessee, the Tribunal held that liability as an assessee in default could not be fastened for the relevant period because binding interim High Court directions governed deduction of tax on LFC payments. Non-deduction in compliance with those judicial orders did not attract the rigours of section 201(1) or consequential interest under section 201(1A), and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling could not retrospectively create that default. The demand and interest were deleted.
TDS on leave fare concession payments was disputed where the assessee bank had treated the benefit as exempt, but employees had undertaken foreign-leg journeys. Although the substantive exemption under section 10(5) was found against the assessee, the Tribunal held that liability as an assessee in default could not be fastened for the relevant period because binding interim High Court directions governed deduction of tax on LFC payments. Non-deduction in compliance with those judicial orders did not attract the rigours of section 201(1) or consequential interest under section 201(1A), and the subsequent Supreme Court ruling could not retrospectively create that default. The demand and interest were deleted.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4814 
Join Channel 
