Bundled services in electricity transmission and distribution are exempt from service tax, including late payment surcharge, meter rent, and supervision charges as per Section 66F(3).
Where the implication of a person was for a non-bailable offence, he could apply for anticipatory bail. If the applicant cooperated with the inquiry, there was no requirement of his arrest. Assessee was having his own address of residence and business. He could give surety ensuring his appearance. Therefore, he deserved to be granted limited protection for the purpose of conclusion of inquiry by the Proper Officer. Thus, Allahabad High Court granted the anticipatory bail to a person alleged of GST evasion to the tune of Rs.100 Crores.
Commissioner of Customs Vs Aditya Birla Nuvo Ltd. (Karnataka High Court) Conclusion: Imported material could be disposed of or utilized in any manner including local sale once the export obligations were fulfilled and the only requirement as per condition No.(vii) was that such inputs should not be sold or transferred in the market. In other words, […]
Writ Court was not to be ordinarily approached in detention cases where effective alternate remedies by way of provisional clearance, and appeal thereafter, were provided against alleged arbitrary/illegal detention orders.
DCIT Vs Barclays Technology Centre India Pvt. Ltd. (ITAT Pune) Conclusion: Liability to deduct tax at source on leased line charges could be fastened only under the law prevailing at the time of payment. If no liability existed at the time of payment, any subsequent retrospective amendment could not be enforced against the payer. Once […]
Assessee was justified in claiming exemption from payment of integrated tax under the Exemption Notification on re-import of repaired parts/ aircrafts into India during the period commencing August 2017 to March 2019.
Income earned by assessee from sale of software, either directly to the customers in India or through Distributors or Resellers constituted its business income and not the Royalty income. As admittedly assessee did not have any Permanent Establishment in India, such income will not magnetize Indian taxation.
The arbitration agreement would not be rendered invalid, un-enforceable or non-existent, even if the substantive contract is not admissible in evidence, or cannot be acted upon on account of non-payment of Stamp Duty.
No income tax applicable on receipt of software license fees from an Indian subsidiary as it was reimbursement of software licence fees paid by assessee to a third party, and, therefore, it could not constitute income taxable in the hands of assessee.
Mere suspicion of likely escapement of income was not a ground for revision by invoking powers u/s 263 of the Act. Such an order was bad in law.
