https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373559 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. It was determined that the interest income from late payments did not qualify as banking or financial services, leading to the conclusion that the demands and penalties imposed on the appellant were unsustainable. The tribunal emphasized that the nature of the activity determines the classification of services, and in this case, the interest income was associated with stockbroking services, not banking or financial services. en-us Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 16 Jan 2019 09:18:57 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373559 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal. It was determined that the interest income from late payments did not qualify as banking or financial services, leading to the conclusion that the demands and penalties imposed on the appellant were unsustainable. The tribunal emphasized that the nature of the activity determines the classification of services, and in this case, the interest income was associated with stockbroking services, not banking or financial services. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373559