<?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>2026 (4) TMI 1434 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790365</link>
    <description>Testing and analysis services performed in India were treated as export of service where the reports and deliverables were supplied to foreign clients abroad and consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange; on that basis, service tax was not payable on those transactions. For domestic clearances, cum-duty benefit and demand recomputation required fresh examination, so the matter was remanded on quantification. Nondisclosure of taxable receipts in returns and tax payment only after investigation justified invocation of the extended period and penalty for domestic services. The statutory penalty was to be recomputed on remand, with earlier pre-investigation payment capable of appropriation but not eliminating the penalty basis.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 Apr 2026 08:52:16 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=898204" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 1434 - CESTAT HYDERABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790365</link>
      <description>Testing and analysis services performed in India were treated as export of service where the reports and deliverables were supplied to foreign clients abroad and consideration was received in convertible foreign exchange; on that basis, service tax was not payable on those transactions. For domestic clearances, cum-duty benefit and demand recomputation required fresh examination, so the matter was remanded on quantification. Nondisclosure of taxable receipts in returns and tax payment only after investigation justified invocation of the extended period and penalty for domestic services. The statutory penalty was to be recomputed on remand, with earlier pre-investigation payment capable of appropriation but not eliminating the penalty basis.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 22 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790365</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>