https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763449 Contractual documents and billing showed that the foreign principal supplied support services directly to the Indian telecom customer, invoiced that customer, and received payment from it. On that basis, the place of provision and reverse charge framework indicated that services supplied from outside India and received in India were taxable in the hands of the recipient in the taxable territory, so the Indian branch was not the service provider for the disputed amount. The record also showed disclosure of the transactions in returns and correspondence, with no wilful suppression or misstatement, so the extended period of limitation was not available. The demand was therefore unsustainable and time-barred. en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Dec 2024 11:38:54 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763449 Contractual documents and billing showed that the foreign principal supplied support services directly to the Indian telecom customer, invoiced that customer, and received payment from it. On that basis, the place of provision and reverse charge framework indicated that services supplied from outside India and received in India were taxable in the hands of the recipient in the taxable territory, so the Indian branch was not the service provider for the disputed amount. The record also showed disclosure of the transactions in returns and correspondence, with no wilful suppression or misstatement, so the extended period of limitation was not available. The demand was therefore unsustainable and time-barred. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763449