Abhishek Raja "Ram"

@abhishekrajaram

8 months ago

•View on X

š—–š—²š˜€š˜š—®š˜ š—–š—µš—²š—»š—»š—®š—¶ š—„š˜‚š—¹š—¶š—»š—“ š—¼š—» š—™š—¼š—æš—²š—°š—¹š—¼š˜€š˜‚š—æš—² š—–š—µš—®š—æš—“š—²š˜€ šŸ“¢ š—§š—µš—² š—§š—æš—¶š—Æš˜‚š—»š—®š—¹ š—µš—²š—¹š—±: "Foreclosure charges collected by banks and NBFCs on premature loan terminations are damages and not subject to Service Tax. Appeal allowed."

šŸ” š—™š—®š—°š˜š˜€: š—”š—½š—½š—²š—¹š—¹š—®š—»š˜: M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd. š—œš˜€š˜€š˜‚š—²: Foreclosure charges by banks/NBFCs for premature loan termination are deemed damages, not taxable under Service Tax. CESTAT Chennai ruled in favor of M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd., setting aside demands.

āš–ļø š—š˜‚š—±š—“š—²š—ŗš—²š—»š˜: The Tribunal ruled foreclosure charges as damages for contract breaches, not taxable under Service Tax, citing the Repco India Ltd. case. The Finance Act's Section 65(12) amendment defining "lending" under "Banking and Other Financial Services" was deemed inapplicable. The demand and penalties were set aside, allowing the appeal.

šŸ“œ š—–š—®š˜€š—² š—œš—»š—³š—¼š—æš—ŗš—®š˜š—¶š—¼š—»: š—§š—¶š˜š—¹š—²: M/s. Sundaram Finance Ltd. vs. The Commissioner of GST & Central Excise š—¢š—æš—±š—²š—æ š——š—®š˜š—²: 22 February 2023 šŸ“œ This ruling affirms that foreclosure charges are not subject to Service Tax as they constitute damages for contract breaches.

More from @abhishekrajaramReply on X

Page created with TweetHunter

Write your own