Just a moment...
Convert scanned orders, printed notices, PDFs and images into clean, searchable, editable text within seconds. Starting at 2 Credits/page
Try Now →Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
Use comma for multiple locations.
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Don't have an account? Register Here
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
Issues: (i) Whether amounts recovered as bundling error charges, rejection charges, non-compliance charges and similar deductions constituted consideration for a declared service under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994.
Analysis: A declared service under Section 66E(e) requires a specific agreement where one party, for consideration, agrees to refrain from an act, tolerate an act or situation, or do an act. The statutory definition of service under Section 65B(44) also requires an activity carried out for consideration. Amounts recovered as penalties, liquidated damages or other contractual deductions arising from breach or non-performance do not, by themselves, amount to consideration for tolerating a default. Such recoveries are compensatory or deterrent in nature and are not referable to an independent agreement to tolerate the breach.
Conclusion: The impugned recoveries were not taxable as consideration for a declared service under Section 66E(e), and the demand could not be sustained.
Final Conclusion: The demand was unsustainable and the appeal succeeded, with the impugned order set aside.
Ratio Decidendi: Recovery of contractual penalties or liquidated damages is not consideration for a declared service under Section 66E(e) unless there is an independent agreement to tolerate the act or situation for consideration.