https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210668 Service tax liability could not be fastened on the recipient through show-cause notices issued under the Finance Act, 1994 and the Service Tax Rules, 1994 for the period in question, because the obligation arose only from the amended definition in Rule 2(1)(d) and there was no corresponding statutory liability under Sections 69 and 70. The Tribunal noted that, in the absence of such statutory backing, the department could not proceed against the recipient under Section 73 in the manner adopted. The notices were therefore treated as not maintainable against the service recipient, and the resulting demands were set aside. en-us Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 15 Feb 2012 15:29:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210668 Service tax liability could not be fastened on the recipient through show-cause notices issued under the Finance Act, 1994 and the Service Tax Rules, 1994 for the period in question, because the obligation arose only from the amended definition in Rule 2(1)(d) and there was no corresponding statutory liability under Sections 69 and 70. The Tribunal noted that, in the absence of such statutory backing, the department could not proceed against the recipient under Section 73 in the manner adopted. The notices were therefore treated as not maintainable against the service recipient, and the resulting demands were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 26 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=210668