https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212336 The case revolved around the classification of re-rubberisation of worn-out rubberized rollers as "maintenance or repair" service for service tax liability. The Tribunal considered the absence of a contract between the assessee and customers, citing orders from the Commissioner (Appeals) in Kanpur and Chandigarh. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, indicating that the activity may not attract service tax under the "maintenance and repair service" category due to the lack of a contract. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the prayer for waiver and stayed the recovery of disputed amounts pending appeal, emphasizing the importance of a contractual arrangement in service tax liability assessment. en-us Mon, 25 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 23 Feb 2012 11:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212336 The case revolved around the classification of re-rubberisation of worn-out rubberized rollers as "maintenance or repair" service for service tax liability. The Tribunal considered the absence of a contract between the assessee and customers, citing orders from the Commissioner (Appeals) in Kanpur and Chandigarh. The Tribunal found in favor of the assessee, indicating that the activity may not attract service tax under the "maintenance and repair service" category due to the lack of a contract. Consequently, the Tribunal granted the prayer for waiver and stayed the recovery of disputed amounts pending appeal, emphasizing the importance of a contractual arrangement in service tax liability assessment. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 25 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212336