https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207482 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the service provider, holding that the demand for service tax within the normal limitation period was valid, but the demand beyond that period was time-barred. The penalty imposition was set aside due to the absence of malafide intentions by the appellants and their genuine belief in the non-inclusion of material costs in the service value. The authorities were directed to recalculate the service tax demand within the normal limitation period and waive the penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. en-us Thu, 01 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 14 Dec 2011 09:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207482 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the service provider, holding that the demand for service tax within the normal limitation period was valid, but the demand beyond that period was time-barred. The penalty imposition was set aside due to the absence of malafide intentions by the appellants and their genuine belief in the non-inclusion of material costs in the service value. The authorities were directed to recalculate the service tax demand within the normal limitation period and waive the penalty under Section 80 of the Finance Act, 1994. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 01 Sep 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=207482