Rectification of mistake remains limited to self-evident record errors, preventing merits review through miscellaneous applications and preserving fin...
Tender creditworthiness conditions may extend to de facto Promoter Directors, with post-participation challenges generally barred absent arbitrariness...
Corporate representation in PMLA summons proceedings permitted through an authorised signatory, subject to directors' continuing cooperation and atten...
Helicopter charter classification requires effective control analysis, while territorial performance, reasoned credit orders and wilful suppression de...
Specified fund definition expands PAN exemption eligibility for registered alternative investment funds and qualifying International Financial Service...
Tax exemption for specified legal-services authority income applies retrospectively, subject to non-commercial activity, unchanged income sources, and...
Page of 4817
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1201 to 1220 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 
