https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77273 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order as correct and legal. It affirmed that the services provided by the respondent were rightly classified under Mandap Keeper services, and there was no suppression of facts. The exemption under Notification No. 12/01 was applicable, and the Circular dated 2003 had prospective application. Therefore, the impugned order was upheld, and the Revenue's appeal was deemed devoid of merits. en-us Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 03 Sep 2010 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77273 The Tribunal rejected the Revenue's appeal, upholding the Commissioner (Appeals) order as correct and legal. It affirmed that the services provided by the respondent were rightly classified under Mandap Keeper services, and there was no suppression of facts. The exemption under Notification No. 12/01 was applicable, and the Circular dated 2003 had prospective application. Therefore, the impugned order was upheld, and the Revenue's appeal was deemed devoid of merits. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 15 Jun 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=77273