9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (11) TMI 694X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Civil Appeal filed by the Revenue challenging the order of the Tribunal has been dismissed by the Hon ble Apex Court stating that there are no grounds to entertain this appeal, the doctrine of merger applies the order of the Tribunal and gets merged in that of the Hon ble Apex Court. There are no merit in the impugned order - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant. - Service Tax Appeal No. 85402 of 2017 - A/87144/2021 - Dated:- 16-11-2021 - MR. SANJIV SRIVASTAVA, MEMBER (TECHNICAL) AND DR. SUVENDU KUMAR PATI, MEMBER (JUDICIAL) Shri Bhavin Gandhi, Chartered Accountant, for the Appellant Shri Dilip Shinde, Assistant Commissioner, Authorised Representative for the Respondent ORDER This appeal has been direct ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ions of amended Section 76 of the Finance Act, 1994 with an option for payment of only 25% of the penalty imposed, provided conditions laid down under clause (ii) to the second proviso to Section 76 of Finance Act 1994 is satisfied. (viii) I also imposed a penalty of ₹ 10,000/- (Rupees Ten thousand only) under Section 77(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 on the assessee. 2.1 The appellant was charging refundable security deposit from their tenant along with licence fee while renting immovable property. This security deposit was retained by them for the duration of the tenancy and refunded back on termination of the tenancy agreement period. 2.2 Valuation of taxable services is the gross amount charged by the service provider fo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order No. A/94140/16/STB dated 02.12.2016 in appellant s own case. Appeal filed by the Revenue against this order has been dismissed by the Hon ble Supreme Court also. Since the issue is no longer res integra, the appeal should be allowed in their favour. 2.6 Learned Authorised Representative for the Revenue reiterates the findings of the Commissioner in the impugned order. 3.1 We have considered the impugned order along with the submissions made in the appeal and during the course of argument. 3.2 We find that the issue with regard to adding notional interest in the taxable value of the service provided was considered by this Tribunal in the order referred to by the learned Chartered Accountant in the appellant s own case. In par ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
