<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2024 (11) TMI 1445 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461448</link>
    <description>Reimbursement of salary and allowances paid to the State Police Department for deployment of police personnel was held not taxable as support service under the Finance Act, 1994, because the disputed period fell within the negative list regime and the activity reflected a statutory sovereign function relating to public security and law and order; the demand was set aside. Meter inspection charges, vendor registration charges and tender cost were treated as incidental or bid-process related receipts, not consideration for a taxable service, and amounts received for pre-term resignation and tender-condition breaches were characterised as compensation rather than consideration for tolerating an act or situation; those demands were also set aside. Principal demands and penalties were largely deleted, leaving only the balance demand and interest confirmed in the impugned order.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 07 Apr 2025 19:01:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=812438" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2024 (11) TMI 1445 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461448</link>
      <description>Reimbursement of salary and allowances paid to the State Police Department for deployment of police personnel was held not taxable as support service under the Finance Act, 1994, because the disputed period fell within the negative list regime and the activity reflected a statutory sovereign function relating to public security and law and order; the demand was set aside. Meter inspection charges, vendor registration charges and tender cost were treated as incidental or bid-process related receipts, not consideration for a taxable service, and amounts received for pre-term resignation and tender-condition breaches were characterised as compensation rather than consideration for tolerating an act or situation; those demands were also set aside. Principal demands and penalties were largely deleted, leaving only the balance demand and interest confirmed in the impugned order.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 26 Nov 2024 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=461448</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>