<?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 (12) TMI 1006 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447322</link>
    <description>CESTAT NEW DELHI held that service charges collected by restaurants beyond food prices are taxable, as they constitute consideration for restaurant services under section 67, regardless of distribution to staff. However, forfeited advance amounts for cancelled hotel bookings (&quot;no show charges&quot;) are not taxable under section 66E(e), following precedents in Lemon Tree Hotel and South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. The demand was largely time-barred as extended limitation period was improperly invoked for interpretational issues. Penalty was waived due to interpretational nature. Appeal partly allowed, with only minor demand for normal limitation period on service charges confirmed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 25 Dec 2023 10:13:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=736434" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (12) TMI 1006 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447322</link>
      <description>CESTAT NEW DELHI held that service charges collected by restaurants beyond food prices are taxable, as they constitute consideration for restaurant services under section 67, regardless of distribution to staff. However, forfeited advance amounts for cancelled hotel bookings (&quot;no show charges&quot;) are not taxable under section 66E(e), following precedents in Lemon Tree Hotel and South Eastern Coalfields Ltd. The demand was largely time-barred as extended limitation period was improperly invoked for interpretational issues. Penalty was waived due to interpretational nature. Appeal partly allowed, with only minor demand for normal limitation period on service charges confirmed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 21 Dec 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=447322</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>