<?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 642 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791440</link>
    <description>Liquidated damages, penalty and forfeiture recovered for contractual breach were held not taxable as declared services because Section 66E(e) applies only where there is an identifiable agreement to refrain from, tolerate, or do an act for consideration; mere compensation for default is outside the levy. Dead rent demand was also set aside because no post-01.04.2016 arrangement was shown. Service tax on residential renting for contractor employees was not sustained on the facts, and no separate liability arose for security and detective agency services where the provider had already discharged the tax. All substantive tax demands were deleted, with only admitted interest confirmed and no penalty imposed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 11 May 2026 10:58:29 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=901225" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (5) TMI 642 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791440</link>
      <description>Liquidated damages, penalty and forfeiture recovered for contractual breach were held not taxable as declared services because Section 66E(e) applies only where there is an identifiable agreement to refrain from, tolerate, or do an act for consideration; mere compensation for default is outside the levy. Dead rent demand was also set aside because no post-01.04.2016 arrangement was shown. Service tax on residential renting for contractor employees was not sustained on the facts, and no separate liability arose for security and detective agency services where the provider had already discharged the tax. All substantive tax demands were deleted, with only admitted interest confirmed and no penalty imposed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 04 May 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=791440</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>