Intermediary service classification fails where overseas admission facilitation is supplied independently, preserving export treatment and small-provi...
Satellite transponder bandwidth is telecommunication, not Business Support Service; foreign non-telegraph providers triggered no service tax liability...
Commitment proceedings gain extended timelines, structured defect refiling, and automatic resumption of inquiry after the adjusted completion period e...
Centralised assessment transfer becomes unwarranted once the searched person's assessment is complete, requiring restoration to the appropriate charge...
Reassessment notices issued under the new regime were held time-barred because, for notices originally issued between 01/04/2021 and 30/06/2021, only the surviving time available up to 30/06/2021 could be used after excluding the stayed period and the two weeks allowed for response. Applying the Supreme Court rulings in Rajeev Bansal and Ashish Agarwal, the Tribunal held that the fresh notice had to be issued within the remaining limitation under section 149. In this case, the notice issued on 25/07/2022 exceeded that limit, so the reassessment proceedings and assessment orders were quashed, with other grounds left open.
Reassessment notices issued under the new regime were held time-barred because, for notices originally issued between 01/04/2021 and 30/06/2021, only the surviving time available up to 30/06/2021 could be used after excluding the stayed period and the two weeks allowed for response. Applying the Supreme Court rulings in Rajeev Bansal and Ashish Agarwal, the Tribunal held that the fresh notice had to be issued within the remaining limitation under section 149. In this case, the notice issued on 25/07/2022 exceeded that limit, so the reassessment proceedings and assessment orders were quashed, with other grounds left open.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.