Transfer pricing and tax deductions upheld on established principles, while employee contributions and warranty provisions returned for fresh examinat...
Captive transfer pricing relies on industrial consumer tariffs, while genuine quotations can benchmark effluent treatment transfers under the Other Me...
Specific tariff classification for ophthalmic instruments and extended limitation principles determine the treatment of duty demands, confiscation, an...
Integrated golf function determines classification, placing launch monitors and simulators under other golf equipment rather than measuring instrument...
Public servant status under anti-corruption law extends to recognised stock exchange leadership; constitutional and sanction challenges do not succeed...
Acquiescence, homebuyer protection and clean-slate resolution principles prevent landowners from disrupting an integrated project through late termina...
Page of 4792
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
1001 to 1020 of 95833 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
A statutory electricity regulatory commission's tariff, licensing and allied regulatory functions were held to be adjudicatory and regulatory in nature, not trade, commerce or business. Fees collected for discharging those functions were therefore not consideration for a taxable supply, and the Schedule III exclusion for services by courts and tribunals applied. The Court further held that no artificial bifurcation between regulatory and quasi-judicial functions was permissible. As the commission stood on the same footing as the regulatory commission considered in the earlier Delhi High Court ruling, the notices and orders seeking to levy service tax and GST were ex facie unsustainable and were set aside.
A statutory electricity regulatory commission's tariff, licensing and allied regulatory functions were held to be adjudicatory and regulatory in nature, not trade, commerce or business. Fees collected for discharging those functions were therefore not consideration for a taxable supply, and the Schedule III exclusion for services by courts and tribunals applied. The Court further held that no artificial bifurcation between regulatory and quasi-judicial functions was permissible. As the commission stood on the same footing as the regulatory commission considered in the earlier Delhi High Court ruling, the notices and orders seeking to levy service tax and GST were ex facie unsustainable and were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.