Charitable trust registration requires a specified-violation notice; settled cash deposits and related-party payments did not justify cancellation or ...
External development charges trigger TDS under section 194C, while disputed administrative payments require factual verification and fresh adjudicatio...
Section 270AA penalty immunity requires identified statutory defaults and a hearing before rejection; reassessment disclosure may constitute under-rep...
Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
GST could not be levied again on a shipping line's ocean freight services for CIF imports where the freight component had already suffered customs duty in the import transaction, because the transportation service formed part of a composite supply. The Court held that taxing the same service element separately in the hands of the petitioner would amount to double taxation and would be inconsistent with the GST scheme. Relying on Union of India v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd., it found that transportation and insurance in a CIF contract are naturally bundled with the supply of goods. The show-cause notice and adjudication order were quashed, and refund with interest was directed.
GST could not be levied again on a shipping line's ocean freight services for CIF imports where the freight component had already suffered customs duty in the import transaction, because the transportation service formed part of a composite supply. The Court held that taxing the same service element separately in the hands of the petitioner would amount to double taxation and would be inconsistent with the GST scheme. Relying on Union of India v. Mohit Minerals Pvt. Ltd., it found that transportation and insurance in a CIF contract are naturally bundled with the supply of goods. The show-cause notice and adjudication order were quashed, and refund with interest was directed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4828 
Join Channel 
