<?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>Service tax on bank commitment charges referred to Larger Bench amid conflicting Tribunal views on taxability.</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99343</link>
    <description>Conflicting coordinate Bench decisions on whether bank commitment charges for keeping sanctioned loan funds available are exigible to service tax required a Larger Bench reference. One view treated the charges as consideration for the bank&#039;s contractual commitment to lend, with a clear quid pro quo and no character as interest; the other view, invoking judicial discipline, found that earlier coordinate decisions could not be ignored and that the matter should be placed before the President for constitution of a Larger Bench. The substantive taxability question, along with the precedential effect of the appellant&#039;s earlier case, was left open for authoritative determination.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:14:36 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:14:37 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899312" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>Service tax on bank commitment charges referred to Larger Bench amid conflicting Tribunal views on taxability.</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99343</link>
      <description>Conflicting coordinate Bench decisions on whether bank commitment charges for keeping sanctioned loan funds available are exigible to service tax required a Larger Bench reference. One view treated the charges as consideration for the bank&#039;s contractual commitment to lend, with a clear quid pro quo and no character as interest; the other view, invoking judicial discipline, found that earlier coordinate decisions could not be ignored and that the matter should be placed before the President for constitution of a Larger Bench. The substantive taxability question, along with the precedential effect of the appellant&#039;s earlier case, was left open for authoritative determination.</description>
      <category>Highlights</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 01 May 2026 10:14:36 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=99343</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>