2 The Court of First Instance in the grounds of the judgment dgft mumbai under appeal agrees dgft m

Current Economic dgft mumbai News Corporate Events Ongoing calls Payroll Payroll Clearing contributions Mileage 2012 Subsistence Statistics 2012 wage payroll News Services Council of entrepreneurship Sign sp Establishment doo doo differences and sp Business Plans Marketing Plan Company Name entrepreneur Dictionary Cooperation Accounting Financial Management Contemporary Accounting Accounting Business Business opportunity club Samples of contracts Useful Lists Accessories Informant
Recent posts Slovenian Enterprise Fund issued a new call for tenders is published, the new Rules on minimum technical conditions and the extent of services for the restaurant business Government issued a revised Regulation dgft mumbai on uniform methodology and forms for the calculation and payment of salaries in the public sector Determining the tax base normiranca and determining insurance basics - the amount of partial exemptions Determination of insurance base for the self-employed, partners and farmers in 2014 Last comments franc: I am a year for twenty years p ... Gretel: I wonder if it is for the year 201 ... tone: Straight norčevanje- reasoned oral health ... Services: Neat blog! Is your theme custo ... Jozica: I wonder if it is for the year 201 ... Archives Select Month April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 July 2013 June 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 September 2012 August 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008
Categories of Events (85) Income dgft mumbai tax (50) Economy (21) Finance & Taxes (57) Guest post (27) The Informant dgft mumbai (415) Management (12) Media (21) Thoughts and quotes (43) News (214) Payroll (29 ) Calculation of contributions (34) Notifications members (22) Summary of the accounting officer (37) entrepreneur Dictionary (50) Business Law (17) Entrepreneurship (173) Explanation dgft mumbai Administration (347) Accessories (54) Accounting (618) Tenders (141) Jurisprudence ( 14) Statistics (68) World Entrepreneurship (5) Consulting (80) Marketing (12) Legislation (82) Interesting (38)
November Craft Law inspiration working days battery recovery reliability for car New Year's Fair retirement Maribor e-Justice Portal list of beneficiaries of grants financial fair subletting vessels of clearing cleaning in private households
Reference number: Judgment of the X Ips 259/2008 Reference number 2: Judgment UPRS U 2512/2006 Department: Administrative Department Date panel session: 15.07.2010 Category: TAXES Institute: dgft mumbai authorized audit - the value criterion - value added tax - a lower tax rate - holders of words, images and sounds - Design Ref: Value Added Tax Act, Article 25, 25 / 1-7.
CORE: Designing dgft mumbai the service activity, which is an integral part of the project documentation, so a lower tax rate in accordance with paragraph 7 of Article dgft mumbai 25 of the VAT Act on the market that is subject to taxation in the present case does not apply because the design is not transport of goods.
JUSTIFICATION: 1 By judgment under appeal, the Court of First Instance dgft mumbai pursuant to the first paragraph of Article 63 of the Law on Administrative Disputes - ZUS-1 dismissed the action of the applicant (auditor) against the decision of the defendant on 23 7th, 2007, by which the defendant upholding the auditors appeal against the decision of the Tax Office L. of 4 12 2002, in so far as it relates to the harmonization of appetite default interest by the decision of the Constitutional Court, no. UI-356/02 dated 23 9 2004 the remainder dgft mumbai of the complaint is rejected. The contested first instance decision was revidentu ordered dgft mumbai to pay value added tax (VAT) for the fiscal period from 1 11 1999 to 31 12 1999 1 2 31 7 2000 to 2000 a total amount of 50,209,878 00 SIT.
2 The Court of First Instance in the grounds of the judgment dgft mumbai under appeal agrees dgft mumbai with the reasons given by the reasoning of the contested decision the defendant, and states that the plaintiff is engaged in the business of designing, engineering and technical consultancy dgft mumbai in the framework which also includes the preparation of project documentation . Referred to in clause 7 of the first paragraph of Article 25 of the Law on Value Added Tax that the latter refers to the transport of goods to the market with pre-designed plans, elaborations, and other parts of the project documentation, the plaintiff shall be dealt with service activity, which included the preparation of project documentation.
3 against the first instance judgment of the auditor lodged an appeal, which refers to the audit cause substantial procedural violation in an administrative dispute and erroneous application of substantive law