https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757086 The Appellate Tribunal concluded that the demand for service tax under Section 66E of the Finance Act for "tolerating an act" related to Notice Pay is unsustainable. It set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. The Tribunal relied on precedents, including the High Court of Madras, which clarified that payments for premature termination of employment are not subject to service tax. The Tribunal emphasized that recovery from an employee for breaching a contract or quitting without serving the notice period is not liable for service tax according to Section 66E and Section 65(44) of the Finance Act, 1944. en-us Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Aug 2024 08:16:43 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757086 The Appellate Tribunal concluded that the demand for service tax under Section 66E of the Finance Act for "tolerating an act" related to Notice Pay is unsustainable. It set aside the impugned order, allowing the appeal. The Tribunal relied on precedents, including the High Court of Madras, which clarified that payments for premature termination of employment are not subject to service tax. The Tribunal emphasized that recovery from an employee for breaching a contract or quitting without serving the notice period is not liable for service tax according to Section 66E and Section 65(44) of the Finance Act, 1944. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 13 Aug 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=757086