https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32717 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing M.S. Ingots, received income from introducing buyers and arranging property sales, leading to a dispute over tax liability as a "Real Estate Agent." The Commissioner upheld the tax demand and penalties based on a 2002 letter. The Tribunal found the activities fell under the definition of a "Real Estate Agent," justifying the tax demand. Penalties were reduced, with Rs. 20,000 under Section 76, and upheld at Rs. 500 under Section 75A and Rs. 1000 under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of accordingly. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 May 2010 12:41:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32717 The appellant, engaged in manufacturing M.S. Ingots, received income from introducing buyers and arranging property sales, leading to a dispute over tax liability as a "Real Estate Agent." The Commissioner upheld the tax demand and penalties based on a 2002 letter. The Tribunal found the activities fell under the definition of a "Real Estate Agent," justifying the tax demand. Penalties were reduced, with Rs. 20,000 under Section 76, and upheld at Rs. 500 under Section 75A and Rs. 1000 under Section 77 of the Finance Act, 1994. The appeal was disposed of accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32717