https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426534 Commission paid to a sole selling agent was held not to qualify as input service under Rule 2(l) for the relevant period, because the agreement's predominant character was a sales commission arrangement rather than sales promotion. The references to advertisement, field campaigns, and product support were treated as incidental, and the services were regarded as post-manufacturing and not used in or in relation to manufacture. On limitation, the extended period and penalties were held unsustainable for the first proceedings because the dispute was interpretative and the credit position had been disclosed, so fraud, suppression, or intent to evade were not established. Penalties for wrongful credit were sustained only where inadmissible credit had actually been taken. en-us Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Aug 2022 18:12:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426534 Commission paid to a sole selling agent was held not to qualify as input service under Rule 2(l) for the relevant period, because the agreement's predominant character was a sales commission arrangement rather than sales promotion. The references to advertisement, field campaigns, and product support were treated as incidental, and the services were regarded as post-manufacturing and not used in or in relation to manufacture. On limitation, the extended period and penalties were held unsustainable for the first proceedings because the dispute was interpretative and the credit position had been disclosed, so fraud, suppression, or intent to evade were not established. Penalties for wrongful credit were sustained only where inadmissible credit had actually been taken. Case-Laws Central Excise Wed, 10 Aug 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=426534