https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242833 The Tribunal held that the appellant's activities did not amount to the production of goods under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) and were not conducted "on behalf of the client." The demand raised against the appellant was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. The Tribunal did not address the limitation argument as the appeal was resolved on its merits. en-us Wed, 01 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 Jul 2015 13:01:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242833 The Tribunal held that the appellant's activities did not amount to the production of goods under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) and were not conducted "on behalf of the client." The demand raised against the appellant was set aside, and the appeal was allowed with consequential relief. The Tribunal did not address the limitation argument as the appeal was resolved on its merits. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 01 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=242833