The Haryana AAAR held that consulting and market support services provided to a Malaysian company were intermediary services under the IGST Act. As the place of supply was held to be in India, the services did not qualify as exports or zero-rated supplies.
The ITAT set aside the lower authorities’ orders after considering CBDT Notification No. 31/2023, which increased the leave encashment exemption limit to ₹25 lakh.
The ITAT allowed relief after considering CBDT Notification No. 31/2023, which increased the leave encashment exemption limit to ₹25 lakh. The assessment and appellate orders were set aside.
The ITAT held that leave encashment of ₹7.65 lakh was fully exempt as it fell within the revised ₹25 lakh ceiling under Notification No. 31/2023. The disallowance made by the lower authorities was deleted.
The ITAT restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication of the leave encashment exemption claim. The assessee was directed to substantiate the claim with supporting material.
The ITAT held that leave encashment of ₹6.97 lakh was fully exempt as it fell within the revised ₹25 lakh ceiling under Notification No. 31/2023. The appeal was allowed accordingly.
The ITAT allowed exemption of the entire leave encashment amount after noting that the revised ₹25 lakh ceiling exceeded the amount received on retirement. The appeal was allowed by applying the enhanced exemption limit.
The ITAT held that leave encashment of ₹20.29 lakh received on retirement qualified for exemption as it was within the revised ₹25 lakh ceiling. The Assessing Officer was directed to allow the full claim.
The ITAT allowed exemption of ₹15.93 lakh towards leave encashment after applying the revised ₹25 lakh ceiling under Notification No. 31/2023. The tax demand raised by the CPC was deleted.
The dispute concerned restriction of leave encashment exemption to ₹3 lakh. The Tribunal allowed the full claim after applying the revised exemption limit of ₹25 lakh.
