Dispute Resolution Panel objections must reach both prescribed forums; otherwise assessment may proceed and statutory appeal remains the proper remedy...
Political contribution deductions require recipient party compliance with contribution-reporting conditions; banking-channel donations alone do not qu...
Aggregation under TNMM prevents selective testing of intra-group services without comparable uncontrolled transactions, while appellate additional cla...
Protective assessment cannot duplicate identical receipts under competing characterisations; remote services did not establish a taxable permanent est...
Current account treatment of overseas tournament services removed most FEMA findings, but excess EEFC remittance and delayed repatriation remained bre...
Modification of bail conditions remains available through inherent jurisdiction where onerous deposits undermine justice and cannot recover disputed d...
CESTAT ruled that Delayed Payment Charges (DPC) received by the appellant stockbroker from clients are not includible in the taxable value for service tax purposes. The Tribunal determined that DPCs constitute penal charges for delayed payments rather than consideration for providing a separate service. Applying principles established in Bhayana Builders and other precedents, CESTAT emphasized that "consideration" under Section 67 of the Finance Act must flow from the service recipient to the service provider as payment for services rendered. The Tribunal noted that Circular 137/25/2011 specifically clarifies that DPCs are not chargeable to service tax as they represent penalties rather than service fees. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
CESTAT ruled that Delayed Payment Charges (DPC) received by the appellant stockbroker from clients are not includible in the taxable value for service tax purposes. The Tribunal determined that DPCs constitute penal charges for delayed payments rather than consideration for providing a separate service. Applying principles established in Bhayana Builders and other precedents, CESTAT emphasized that "consideration" under Section 67 of the Finance Act must flow from the service recipient to the service provider as payment for services rendered. The Tribunal noted that Circular 137/25/2011 specifically clarifies that DPCs are not chargeable to service tax as they represent penalties rather than service fees. The impugned order was set aside and the appeal allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4800
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
