https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244847 The Tribunal remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the eligibility for the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST due to lack of examination of relevant documents. It held that sub-contractors are liable to pay service tax regardless of the main contractor's tax payments, rejecting the appellant's argument. The Tribunal upheld the invocation of the extended period for confirming service tax demand but directed a re-computation of penalties under sections 76 and 78. A judge allowed a rebate on the material component but differed on the liability timeline for service tax. The case was referred to the Hon'ble President for a third member's opinion on liability and penalties. en-us Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 10 Mar 2014 10:29:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244847 The Tribunal remanded the case to the adjudicating authority for reconsideration of the eligibility for the benefit of Notification No. 12/2003-ST due to lack of examination of relevant documents. It held that sub-contractors are liable to pay service tax regardless of the main contractor's tax payments, rejecting the appellant's argument. The Tribunal upheld the invocation of the extended period for confirming service tax demand but directed a re-computation of penalties under sections 76 and 78. A judge allowed a rebate on the material component but differed on the liability timeline for service tax. The case was referred to the Hon'ble President for a third member's opinion on liability and penalties. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 12 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=244847