<?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 (5) TMI 8 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790806</link>
    <description>Conflicting coordinate Bench decisions on the service tax treatment of commitment charges collected by a bank prompted a reference to a Larger Bench. One view treated the charges as consideration for the bank&#039;s contractual commitment to keep sanctioned funds available, while the other applied judicial discipline and declined to decide the merits in light of existing divergence. The Bench concluded that a fresh final ruling on taxability could not properly be recorded in the present proceedings and that authoritative resolution was required by a Larger Bench. The substantive question whether commitment charges are taxable service consideration or akin to interest therefore remained unresolved.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 16:48:23 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=899392" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 8 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790806</link>
      <description>Conflicting coordinate Bench decisions on the service tax treatment of commitment charges collected by a bank prompted a reference to a Larger Bench. One view treated the charges as consideration for the bank&#039;s contractual commitment to keep sanctioned funds available, while the other applied judicial discipline and declined to decide the merits in light of existing divergence. The Bench concluded that a fresh final ruling on taxability could not properly be recorded in the present proceedings and that authoritative resolution was required by a Larger Bench. The substantive question whether commitment charges are taxable service consideration or akin to interest therefore remained unresolved.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 29 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=790806</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>