https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244361 The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to substantiate their claim for providing 'Works Contract Services,' resulting in a demand of Rs.32.94 lakh. While the Tribunal was not convinced by the argument regarding 'Cleaning Services,' it acknowledged the exclusion clause for certain services. The Tribunal directed the Applicant to deposit Rs.15.00 lakh within eight weeks, with the balance dues to be waived upon deposit, and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency. A compliance report was required by a specified date to avoid dismissal of the Appeal. en-us Thu, 09 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 24 Feb 2014 05:42:41 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244361 The Tribunal found that the Applicant failed to substantiate their claim for providing 'Works Contract Services,' resulting in a demand of Rs.32.94 lakh. While the Tribunal was not convinced by the argument regarding 'Cleaning Services,' it acknowledged the exclusion clause for certain services. The Tribunal directed the Applicant to deposit Rs.15.00 lakh within eight weeks, with the balance dues to be waived upon deposit, and recovery stayed during the appeal's pendency. A compliance report was required by a specified date to avoid dismissal of the Appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 09 Jan 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244361