<?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>2023 (7) TMI 827 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440554</link>
    <description>Service tax liability cannot be inferred merely from balance-sheet entries or ST-3 reconciliation differences, because book entries alone do not prove receipt of taxable consideration or rendition of service; admitted short payment already made was treated separately. A 1% joint venture cost allocation and amounts booked for joint venture obligations were treated as internal venture contributions for a common commercial purpose, not as consideration for management or business consultancy service, in the absence of a distinct service-provider and service-recipient relationship. Penalties were also stated to be unsustainable where the dispute arose from reconciliation issues and there was no indication of suppression or intent to evade.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 21 Jul 2023 08:24:54 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=720137" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (7) TMI 827 - CESTAT MUMBAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440554</link>
      <description>Service tax liability cannot be inferred merely from balance-sheet entries or ST-3 reconciliation differences, because book entries alone do not prove receipt of taxable consideration or rendition of service; admitted short payment already made was treated separately. A 1% joint venture cost allocation and amounts booked for joint venture obligations were treated as internal venture contributions for a common commercial purpose, not as consideration for management or business consultancy service, in the absence of a distinct service-provider and service-recipient relationship. Penalties were also stated to be unsustainable where the dispute arose from reconciliation issues and there was no indication of suppression or intent to evade.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 17 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440554</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>