Independent show-cause notices remain separate proceedings, while customs adjudication challenges should ordinarily follow the statutory appellate rem...
Institutional incapacity in customs settlement proceedings excludes non-functional quorum periods from statutory disposal timelines, preventing automa...
Interactive touchscreen panels with integrated computing functions fall under automatic data-processing machines rather than display monitors for cust...
Ex parte injunction service requirements were substantially met, while civil recovery and SFIO investigation into provident fund defalcation continued...
Enforcement of resolution-plan directions continues without a Supreme Court stay, preventing suspension of redistribution and escrowed-fund distributi...
Third-party ownership claims over attached property require Special Court adjudication where purchasers lack registered sale deeds and bona fides rema...
Pure-agent reimbursements in clearing and forwarding services are excluded from taxable value when qualifying third-party payments are properly record...
Page of 4813
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
641 to 660 of 96257 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
Separately billed room charges and meal-plan charges in a hotel invoice were treated as independent supplies, not a bundled accommodation service, because the invoice segregated the consideration and applied separate tax treatment. CESTAT held that the assessee was entitled to 40% abatement on room charges under the accommodation-service notification and 60% abatement on food and beverage charges under Rule 2C, particularly since VAT had been paid on the food and beverage component. On that basis, the service tax demand and penalty were unsustainable and were set aside.
Separately billed room charges and meal-plan charges in a hotel invoice were treated as independent supplies, not a bundled accommodation service, because the invoice segregated the consideration and applied separate tax treatment. CESTAT held that the assessee was entitled to 40% abatement on room charges under the accommodation-service notification and 60% abatement on food and beverage charges under Rule 2C, particularly since VAT had been paid on the food and beverage component. On that basis, the service tax demand and penalty were unsustainable and were set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.