https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1660 The appellant, a clearing and forwarding agent, was held liable to discharge service tax on their services despite arguing they were merely a commission agent. The Commissioner determined the services provided fell under clearing and forwarding agent services. However, the appellant's argument citing a Larger Bench decision was rejected, leading to a penalty imposition. In contrast, the demand for service tax on real estate agent services was deemed erroneous as no services related to real estate transactions were found. The extended period for payment was considered unjustified, resulting in the appeal being allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. en-us Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Mar 2014 10:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1660 The appellant, a clearing and forwarding agent, was held liable to discharge service tax on their services despite arguing they were merely a commission agent. The Commissioner determined the services provided fell under clearing and forwarding agent services. However, the appellant's argument citing a Larger Bench decision was rejected, leading to a penalty imposition. In contrast, the demand for service tax on real estate agent services was deemed erroneous as no services related to real estate transactions were found. The extended period for payment was considered unjustified, resulting in the appeal being allowed with consequential relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 05 Feb 2007 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=1660