https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754159 The CESTAT New Delhi held that forfeiting earnest money does not constitute a declared service under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal ruled that since forfeiture is not a declared service, the question of retaining money as consideration for rendering such service becomes redundant. Relying on the SC decision in Commissioner of Service Tax vs. Bhayana Builders, the tribunal emphasized that only the value of services actually rendered can be considered for service tax calculation. Additionally, the appellant had transferred the forfeited amount to a sub-contractor after receiving the show cause notice, demonstrating no actual retention. The tribunal set aside the lower order and allowed the appeal. en-us Mon, 13 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 11:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754159 The CESTAT New Delhi held that forfeiting earnest money does not constitute a declared service under Section 66E(e) of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal ruled that since forfeiture is not a declared service, the question of retaining money as consideration for rendering such service becomes redundant. Relying on the SC decision in Commissioner of Service Tax vs. Bhayana Builders, the tribunal emphasized that only the value of services actually rendered can be considered for service tax calculation. Additionally, the appellant had transferred the forfeited amount to a sub-contractor after receiving the show cause notice, demonstrating no actual retention. The tribunal set aside the lower order and allowed the appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 13 May 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=754159