Follow Us:

Case Law Details

Case Name : Commissioner of Central Excise Vs G V Associates (CESTAT Chennai)
Related Assessment Year :
With regard to imposition of penalty under Section 75A, 76, 77 and 78 of the Act, the appellants argue that non payment of service tax on the Business Auxiliary Service due to the bonafide belief that the taxable event is existing only in the business transaction between IHFCL and the borrowers and the service rendered by them to IHFCL is secondary in nature. They are not aware of the fact that the service of loan processor rendered by them to IHFCL and the service of sanctioning of loan rendered by IHFCL to borrowers are two separate taxable services. As such the appellants have not also rais...
This is premium content. Please become a Premium member. If you are already a member, login here to access the full content.

Join Taxguru’s Network for Latest updates on Income Tax, GST, Company Law, Corporate Laws and other related subjects.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Search Post by Date
June 2026
M T W T F S S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
2930