https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383027 CESTAT Mumbai held that contractual features requiring labour supply, attendance control, wage compliance and labour licensing were inconsistent with pure job work, so the claimed exemption for intermediate production process job work was not available. Employee canteen recoveries were not includible in taxable value because they were not consideration recovered from the service recipient, requiring recomputation of demand. Non-disclosure of the arrangement justified the extended period, and interest with penalty under section 76 was sustained. Penalty under section 77(2), late fees under section 70(1) and penalty under section 78 were set aside because the returns were filed within extended due dates and simultaneous penalty operation was barred. en-us Mon, 15 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 16 Jul 2019 08:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383027 CESTAT Mumbai held that contractual features requiring labour supply, attendance control, wage compliance and labour licensing were inconsistent with pure job work, so the claimed exemption for intermediate production process job work was not available. Employee canteen recoveries were not includible in taxable value because they were not consideration recovered from the service recipient, requiring recomputation of demand. Non-disclosure of the arrangement justified the extended period, and interest with penalty under section 76 was sustained. Penalty under section 77(2), late fees under section 70(1) and penalty under section 78 were set aside because the returns were filed within extended due dates and simultaneous penalty operation was barred. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 15 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=383027