Raja Abhishek For NIRC 2024

@abhishekrajaram

2 months ago

ā€¢View on Twitter

š—–š—˜š—¦š—§š—”š—§ š—”š—µš—ŗš—²š—±š—®š—Æš—®š—± š—„š˜‚š—¹š—¶š—»š—“ š—¼š—» š—¦š—²š—暝˜ƒš—¶š—°š—² š—§š—®š˜… š—Ÿš—¶š—®š—Æš—¶š—¹š—¶š˜š˜† š—¼š—³ š—–š—µš—®š—暝—¶š˜š—®š—Æš—¹š—² š—§š—暝˜‚š˜€š˜š˜€ šŸ“¢ The Tribunal held: "The charitable trust did not qualify as a 'Commercial Training or Coaching Centre' for service tax purposes, and the extended period of limitation cannot be invoked."

šŸ” š—™š—®š—°š˜š˜€: š—–š—¼š—ŗš—½š—®š—»š˜†: Sophisticated Instrumentation, managed by Charutar Vidya Mandal, a public charitable trust. š—œš˜€š˜€š˜‚š—²: Does the appellant qualify as a "Commercial Training or Coaching Centre," justifying service tax? š—”š—°š˜š—¶š˜ƒš—¶š˜š˜†: Provided training to students in science and technology but did not pay service tax, believing they were not a commercial training center.

āš–ļø š—š˜‚š—±š—“š—²š—ŗš—²š—»š˜: The Tribunal ruled that due to ambiguity before 2010 regarding what qualifies as a "Commercial Training or Coaching Centre," the appellant, a charitable trust, reasonably believed they were exempt from service tax. Consequently, invoking the extended limitation period was unjustified. The appeal was allowed on grounds of limitation.

š—–š—®š˜€š—² š—œš—»š—³š—¼š—暝—ŗš—®š˜š—¶š—¼š—»: š—§š—¶š˜š—¹š—²: Sophisticated Instrumentation vs. C.C.E. & S.T.-Vadodara š—¦š—˜š—„š—©š—œš—–š—˜ š—§š—”š—« š—”š—½š—½š—²š—®š—¹ š—”š—¼. 11477 of 2013 š—¢š—暝—±š—²š—æ š——š—®š˜š—²: 22 September 2023 šŸ“œ This ruling clarifies that charitable trusts with a reasonable belief of exemption are not subject to extended limitation for service tax.

More from @abhishekrajaramReply on Twitter

Page created with TweetHunter

Write your own