<?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>2025 (10) TMI 729 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779933</link>
    <description>Service tax on examination-related receipts was found unsustainable because taxability requires an identifiable service, a discernible recipient, and consideration from that recipient; fees collected from candidates to meet examination costs did not amount to consideration from the alleged departmental recipients, so the demand was set aside. Receipts under miscellaneous recoveries and rent from immovable property were treated as taxable, and the related service tax, interest, and penalty under Section 78 were sustained. The extended period was also supported by suppression and non-disclosure. Penalty under Section 76 was considered unwarranted once the extended-period demand was upheld and was deleted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 17 Oct 2025 10:27:58 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=858809" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 729 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779933</link>
      <description>Service tax on examination-related receipts was found unsustainable because taxability requires an identifiable service, a discernible recipient, and consideration from that recipient; fees collected from candidates to meet examination costs did not amount to consideration from the alleged departmental recipients, so the demand was set aside. Receipts under miscellaneous recoveries and rent from immovable property were treated as taxable, and the related service tax, interest, and penalty under Section 78 were sustained. The extended period was also supported by suppression and non-disclosure. Penalty under Section 76 was considered unwarranted once the extended-period demand was upheld and was deleted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Sep 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=779933</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>