https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342364 The Tribunal held that the appellants were liable for service tax under "Business Auxiliary Service" for facilitating car loans. It found the show cause notice unjustified as the tax had been paid with interest. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants under Section 73(3) and directed verification for refund claims and cum-tax benefit. Penalties under Section 78 were set aside. The appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing verification of excess payments and cum-tax benefit. en-us Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 27 Aug 2018 12:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342364 The Tribunal held that the appellants were liable for service tax under "Business Auxiliary Service" for facilitating car loans. It found the show cause notice unjustified as the tax had been paid with interest. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants under Section 73(3) and directed verification for refund claims and cum-tax benefit. Penalties under Section 78 were set aside. The appeal was partly allowed, emphasizing verification of excess payments and cum-tax benefit. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 28 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342364