Bona fide disclosure requirements govern under-reporting penalties, and post-penalty immunity applications cannot secure available statutory protectio...
Certificate-of-origin verification procedure governs preferential customs benefits; denial without retroactive verification was set aside with consequ...
Disciplinary Committee jurisdiction and mandatory investigation requirements invalidated cancellation of an insolvency professional's registration and...
Retention of seized property survives where recorded reasons support proceeds of crime, while stayed investigation periods are excluded from limitatio...
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.