Penny-stock additions require transaction-specific evidence; general investigation material alone cannot establish undisclosed income or accommodation...
Transfer pricing comparability prioritises reliable external CUPs and foreign-currency LIBOR benchmarks for exports, borrowings and delayed receivable...
Section 153C satisfaction and seized electronic records sustained unexplained-investment addition, subject to proportionate ownership-share verificati...
Refund of service tax on composite works contracts was rejected because the appellant failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on, as the contract price was inclusive of tax and the customer had deducted part of the tax from payments. The Tribunal also found that the development and construction activities involved transfer of property in goods and therefore fell within works contract service, making the tax payment and corresponding refund claim untenable. It further reiterated that refund proceedings cannot be used to reopen unchallenged self-assessments or disturb assessments that have attained finality. The rejection of the refund claim was upheld.
Refund of service tax on composite works contracts was rejected because the appellant failed to prove that the tax burden had not been passed on, as the contract price was inclusive of tax and the customer had deducted part of the tax from payments. The Tribunal also found that the development and construction activities involved transfer of property in goods and therefore fell within works contract service, making the tax payment and corresponding refund claim untenable. It further reiterated that refund proceedings cannot be used to reopen unchallenged self-assessments or disturb assessments that have attained finality. The rejection of the refund claim was upheld.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
