Tax exemption for regulatory authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and return filing...
Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
961 to 980 of 96333 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Entities registered as societies were treated as governmental authorities because they were established and wholly controlled by the Haryana Government to perform citizen-facing statutory functions through e-governance, and the amounts collected were statutory fees rather than commercial consideration. On that basis, services relating to municipal functions under Notification No. 25/2012-ST were exempt, so the service tax demand on merits failed. The Tribunal also found no suppression or intent to evade tax: the dispute was interpretational, the activities were in the public domain, and the entities acted under bona fide belief. The extended period and consequential penalties under Sections 77 and 78 were therefore unsustainable.
Entities registered as societies were treated as governmental authorities because they were established and wholly controlled by the Haryana Government to perform citizen-facing statutory functions through e-governance, and the amounts collected were statutory fees rather than commercial consideration. On that basis, services relating to municipal functions under Notification No. 25/2012-ST were exempt, so the service tax demand on merits failed. The Tribunal also found no suppression or intent to evade tax: the dispute was interpretational, the activities were in the public domain, and the entities acted under bona fide belief. The extended period and consequential penalties under Sections 77 and 78 were therefore unsustainable.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4817 
Join Channel 
