https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78610 The case involved a dispute regarding the levy of service tax on liquidated damages, security deposit, earnest money deposit, and retention money. The Appellate Tribunal held that these amounts do not constitute consideration for tolerating an act under u/s 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its decision. Consequently, the appellant was deemed not liable to pay service tax on the forfeited amounts. The impugned order was found to lack merit and was set aside, resulting in the appeal being allowed. en-us Wed, 19 Jun 2024 11:45:08 +0530 Wed, 19 Jun 2024 11:45:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78610 The case involved a dispute regarding the levy of service tax on liquidated damages, security deposit, earnest money deposit, and retention money. The Appellate Tribunal held that these amounts do not constitute consideration for tolerating an act under u/s 66E(e) of the Finance Act. The Tribunal cited a previous case to support its decision. Consequently, the appellant was deemed not liable to pay service tax on the forfeited amounts. The impugned order was found to lack merit and was set aside, resulting in the appeal being allowed. Highlights Service Tax Wed, 19 Jun 2024 11:45:08 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=78610