https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442018 The HC held that service tax on lease is ultimately borne by the lessee (service recipient), although the lessor (service provider) is statutorily liable to pay it to the government. The Court affirmed that the service provider has a legal right to recover service tax from the recipient even absent an explicit agreement. The appeal challenging this principle was dismissed. Regarding pendente lite interest, the Plaintiff was entitled to interest only from the date of suit filing onward, not prior. The trial court's decree was upheld with modification limiting interest to the period from suit filing to the date specified, recognizing the principle that wrongful withholding of money warrants compensation. en-us Tue, 28 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 11 Aug 2025 14:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442018 The HC held that service tax on lease is ultimately borne by the lessee (service recipient), although the lessor (service provider) is statutorily liable to pay it to the government. The Court affirmed that the service provider has a legal right to recover service tax from the recipient even absent an explicit agreement. The appeal challenging this principle was dismissed. Regarding pendente lite interest, the Plaintiff was entitled to interest only from the date of suit filing onward, not prior. The trial court's decree was upheld with modification limiting interest to the period from suit filing to the date specified, recognizing the principle that wrongful withholding of money warrants compensation. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 28 Mar 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442018