https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786204 Forfeited security deposits and earnest money deposits were held not to be consideration for a service because forfeiture lacks a quid pro quo or activity; consequence: demand for tax on forfeited amounts set aside. Tender fees for provision of tender documents were held to be akin to sale of documents, not a service, so service-tax demand on tender fees set aside. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected because no positive, intentional evasion or conscious act was found; consequence: demands beyond the normal limitation period are barred. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. en-us Tue, 03 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 09 Feb 2026 09:17:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786204 Forfeited security deposits and earnest money deposits were held not to be consideration for a service because forfeiture lacks a quid pro quo or activity; consequence: demand for tax on forfeited amounts set aside. Tender fees for provision of tender documents were held to be akin to sale of documents, not a service, so service-tax demand on tender fees set aside. Invocation of the extended period of limitation was rejected because no positive, intentional evasion or conscious act was found; consequence: demands beyond the normal limitation period are barred. The impugned order is set aside and the appeal is allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 03 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=786204