https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764783 CESTAT Chennai ruled on service tax exemption and foreign exchange transactions. The tribunal held that Notification 2011 operates prospectively, not retrospectively, denying exemption claims for 2008-2011 under Notification 2009. The court confirmed that Rule 6(7B) option belongs to the assessee, not revenue authorities. Regarding profit on settlement, the tribunal sustained the Commissioner's findings that such profits form part of taxable value. However, profits on foreign exchange sales to EEFC account holders were deemed non-taxable due to absence of monetary consideration flow. The appeal was partly allowed. en-us Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 17 Jan 2025 18:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764783 CESTAT Chennai ruled on service tax exemption and foreign exchange transactions. The tribunal held that Notification 2011 operates prospectively, not retrospectively, denying exemption claims for 2008-2011 under Notification 2009. The court confirmed that Rule 6(7B) option belongs to the assessee, not revenue authorities. Regarding profit on settlement, the tribunal sustained the Commissioner's findings that such profits form part of taxable value. However, profits on foreign exchange sales to EEFC account holders were deemed non-taxable due to absence of monetary consideration flow. The appeal was partly allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 17 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764783