https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766046 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal in a service tax dispute. The tribunal upheld a demand of Rs 2,17,314 with interest and penalties under Sections 75 and 78, finding the appellant suppressed gross consideration value for services provided elsewhere (not to the main client). However, the tribunal set aside interest demand on Rs 4,17,179 deposited by appellant on 12.09.2009, ruling the tax was paid promptly upon receipt from the client when service tax was payable on receipt basis, not accrual basis, thus no delay occurred warranting interest or Section 76 penalties. en-us Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 17 Feb 2025 08:48:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766046 CESTAT Allahabad partially allowed the appeal in a service tax dispute. The tribunal upheld a demand of Rs 2,17,314 with interest and penalties under Sections 75 and 78, finding the appellant suppressed gross consideration value for services provided elsewhere (not to the main client). However, the tribunal set aside interest demand on Rs 4,17,179 deposited by appellant on 12.09.2009, ruling the tax was paid promptly upon receipt from the client when service tax was payable on receipt basis, not accrual basis, thus no delay occurred warranting interest or Section 76 penalties. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 14 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766046