<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2018 (9) TMI 828 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367092</link>
    <description>Notional interest accruing on a security deposit taken in connection with renting of immovable property is not part of the agreed rent and cannot be added to the taxable value for service tax. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions, treated valuation under the renting service category as confined to the actual consideration for the service. Penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were also held unsustainable because the dispute was purely interpretational, so penal consequences were not warranted. The security-deposit interest was excluded from valuation and the penalties were removed, while the remaining service tax demand was left undisturbed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Sat, 15 Sep 2018 07:37:42 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=534459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (9) TMI 828 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367092</link>
      <description>Notional interest accruing on a security deposit taken in connection with renting of immovable property is not part of the agreed rent and cannot be added to the taxable value for service tax. The Tribunal, following its earlier decisions, treated valuation under the renting service category as confined to the actual consideration for the service. Penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were also held unsustainable because the dispute was purely interpretational, so penal consequences were not warranted. The security-deposit interest was excluded from valuation and the penalties were removed, while the remaining service tax demand was left undisturbed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=367092</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>