Retrospective application of beneficial circulars upheld, binding officers and granting post adjudication relief where adjudication occurred after cir...
Admissibility of Investigation Statements requires witness examination before the adjudicating authority; otherwise statements cannot sustain a penalt...
Transaction value and connected person treatment in excise valuation: proprietary concerns not inter connected undertakings, relief on valuation and c...
Appointment of Registrars as adjudicating officers under Companies Act reallocates territorial jurisdiction and sets appeal route to Regional Director...
Composite supply of drilling services and site specific chemicals characterised as composite supply; prior advance rulings set aside, tax rate left op...
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 4814 
Join Channel 
