https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212885 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's appeal, upholding the Commissioner's order for service tax, education cess, interest, and penalties. It determined that the contracts were composite for the erection, commissioning, or installation of WTGs, the appellant was not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 19/2003-ST, and the extended period of limitation was correctly applied due to the appellant's suppression of facts and incorrect self-assessment of service tax. en-us Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Sep 2014 16:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212885 The Tribunal rejected the appellant's appeal, upholding the Commissioner's order for service tax, education cess, interest, and penalties. It determined that the contracts were composite for the erection, commissioning, or installation of WTGs, the appellant was not eligible for the benefit of Notification No. 19/2003-ST, and the extended period of limitation was correctly applied due to the appellant's suppression of facts and incorrect self-assessment of service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 14 Feb 2012 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=212885