https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248996 The appeal was restored after being dismissed for non-prosecution. The appellant challenged penalties imposed under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act but not the demand. The confusion regarding tax liability on commission received on bond and mutual fund sales was addressed, with reliance on Circular No. 66/15/2003. The Tribunal interpreted that mutual fund units are goods, setting aside penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 based on Section 80 of the Finance Act. The appeal was disposed of, upholding the order except for the penalties. en-us Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 01 Jul 2014 11:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248996 The appeal was restored after being dismissed for non-prosecution. The appellant challenged penalties imposed under Sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act but not the demand. The confusion regarding tax liability on commission received on bond and mutual fund sales was addressed, with reliance on Circular No. 66/15/2003. The Tribunal interpreted that mutual fund units are goods, setting aside penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 based on Section 80 of the Finance Act. The appeal was disposed of, upholding the order except for the penalties. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 12 Feb 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=248996