9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 1372X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r (T) None, for the Appellant. Shri A.K. Saini, Authorised Representative, for the Respondent. ORDER [Order per : Ashok Jindal, Member (J)]. - The appellant is in appeal against the impugned order demanding service tax on the late payment charges under the category of 'Banking and Other Financial Services' and has also filed an application for additional grounds. 2. Considering the fact ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lment of higher-purchase charges by the customers. Both the authorities below have confirmed the demand against the appellant. Aggrieved from the said order, the appellant is before us. 3. None appeared on behalf of the appellant. The appeal is taken up for consideration as the issue lies in a narrow compass. 4. The appellant in the grounds of appeal has submitted that C.B.E. & C. Circ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tock brokers are not includible in taxable value as the same are not the charges for providing taxable services. This principle will also apply to other services providers. Therefore, they are not liable to pay service tax on the incidental charges received by them on account of delayed payment of instalment by the customers. 6. On the other hand, Learned AR reiterated the findings in the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ludible in the taxable value for charging service tax. This principle will also apply to other services." 8. As the C.B.E. & C. has clarified that the delayed payment charges are not includible in the taxable value of service, therefore, we hold that the appellant is not liable to pay service tax on these incidental charges received on account of delayed payment of instalment by the customer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
