https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209460 The Tribunal ruled in favor of NBCC, determining that they were liable for site formation services but not business auxiliary services. The sub-contractors, APR and SAC, were also found not liable for business auxiliary services. The Tribunal allowed stay petitions by APR and SAC without pre-deposit, but NBCC was directed to make a specific deposit within a set timeframe. The final hearing was scheduled based on compliance with the deposit order and the disputed service tax amounts. en-us Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 18 Jul 2013 18:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209460 The Tribunal ruled in favor of NBCC, determining that they were liable for site formation services but not business auxiliary services. The sub-contractors, APR and SAC, were also found not liable for business auxiliary services. The Tribunal allowed stay petitions by APR and SAC without pre-deposit, but NBCC was directed to make a specific deposit within a set timeframe. The final hearing was scheduled based on compliance with the deposit order and the disputed service tax amounts. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 21 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209460