Search and seizure: abatement of earlier search bars use of prior seized material in later search-based assessments; relief limited to new documents f...
Admission of additional evidence under remand rules must await a meaningful remand report; failure to do so breaches natural justice and mandates rema...
AAR held that nominal amounts recovered from employees for transportation arranged through third-party vendors did not constitute a supply under Section 7 of the CGST Act. The arrangement was treated as an employee welfare facility, not an activity in the course or furtherance of the applicant's engineering and IT-related business, and the recovery was only partial cost-sharing with no independent consideration accruing to the applicant. The transport facility was also regarded as an employment-linked perquisite covered by Schedule III, and therefore outside the ambit of supply. As the transaction was not taxable, the question of valuation for GST did not arise.
AAR held that nominal amounts recovered from employees for transportation arranged through third-party vendors did not constitute a supply under Section 7 of the CGST Act. The arrangement was treated as an employee welfare facility, not an activity in the course or furtherance of the applicant's engineering and IT-related business, and the recovery was only partial cost-sharing with no independent consideration accruing to the applicant. The transport facility was also regarded as an employment-linked perquisite covered by Schedule III, and therefore outside the ambit of supply. As the transaction was not taxable, the question of valuation for GST did not arise.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
