https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130039 The Tribunal directed a waiver of pre-deposit during the appeal, as there was insufficient evidence to support the Commissioner's claim that the appellant provided pandal and shamiyana services. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant was recognized as an electrical contractor, not a provider of such services, and ordered a further review of the case. en-us Mon, 04 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Apr 2013 10:27:23 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130039 The Tribunal directed a waiver of pre-deposit during the appeal, as there was insufficient evidence to support the Commissioner's claim that the appellant provided pandal and shamiyana services. The Tribunal emphasized that the appellant was recognized as an electrical contractor, not a provider of such services, and ordered a further review of the case. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 04 May 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=130039