Mis-declaration and Concealment: confiscation affirmed, transaction value re-determined and mandatory penalty sustained; redemption allowed on payment...
Page of 4811
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
5561 to 5580 of 96208 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Grant-in-aid from CCRAS was treated as consideration because the payments were linked to approved proposals, deliverables, reporting, audits and specified research work, and the subsidy exclusion for Government grants did not extend by implication. The appellant and CCRAS were separate legal persons, so the research work constituted supply between distinct taxable persons in the course of business, and the appellant was not a pure agent. Exemption under Entries 3 and 3A was denied because the services were research and documentation for a central research body, not functions entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality bodies. The work was classified as taxable research and development services under Heading 9981, and the appeal was rejected.
Grant-in-aid from CCRAS was treated as consideration because the payments were linked to approved proposals, deliverables, reporting, audits and specified research work, and the subsidy exclusion for Government grants did not extend by implication. The appellant and CCRAS were separate legal persons, so the research work constituted supply between distinct taxable persons in the course of business, and the appellant was not a pure agent. Exemption under Entries 3 and 3A was denied because the services were research and documentation for a central research body, not functions entrusted to Panchayat or Municipality bodies. The work was classified as taxable research and development services under Heading 9981, and the appeal was rejected.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4811 
Join Channel 
