https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75035 Further pre-deposit of the balance demand was waived during pendency of the appeal because the contract covered multiple activities and was not confined to a single taxable description. The existing order was treated as non-speaking since it did not examine the contractual scope or the nature of the payments in sufficient detail. Taking into account the deposit already made and the Board Circular relied upon, the tribunal considered no additional deposit necessary at the interim stage. en-us Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Mar 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75035 Further pre-deposit of the balance demand was waived during pendency of the appeal because the contract covered multiple activities and was not confined to a single taxable description. The existing order was treated as non-speaking since it did not examine the contractual scope or the nature of the payments in sufficient detail. Taking into account the deposit already made and the Board Circular relied upon, the tribunal considered no additional deposit necessary at the interim stage. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=75035