https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206920 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue regarding the inclusion of the value of goods and materials in service tax calculation for photography services. However, the extended period of limitation was not applicable due to the respondents' genuine belief based on previous judgments and clarifications. Demands beyond the limitation period were not upheld, and penalties were not imposed as there was no malicious intent. The appeals were allowed for demands within the limitation period, with re-quantification required for those amounts. en-us Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 07 Dec 2015 14:31:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206920 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the Revenue regarding the inclusion of the value of goods and materials in service tax calculation for photography services. However, the extended period of limitation was not applicable due to the respondents' genuine belief based on previous judgments and clarifications. Demands beyond the limitation period were not upheld, and penalties were not imposed as there was no malicious intent. The appeals were allowed for demands within the limitation period, with re-quantification required for those amounts. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 20 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=206920