https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250836 The tribunal upheld the classification of services provided by the appellant to CRS companies as 'Business Auxiliary Service,' emphasizing the marketing and promotion aspect in their agreements. Penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 were upheld due to the dispute on service classification and invocation of extended time, necessitating pre-deposit by the appellant. The tribunal justified the invocation of the extended period for demand confirmation based on the appellant's non-disclosure of agreements, constituting suppression of facts. The appellant was directed to make a pre-deposit without claiming financial hardship, with compliance waiving the balance of dues during the appeal process. en-us Mon, 21 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 30 Jun 2015 15:34:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250836 The tribunal upheld the classification of services provided by the appellant to CRS companies as 'Business Auxiliary Service,' emphasizing the marketing and promotion aspect in their agreements. Penalties under Sections 76, 77, and 78 were upheld due to the dispute on service classification and invocation of extended time, necessitating pre-deposit by the appellant. The tribunal justified the invocation of the extended period for demand confirmation based on the appellant's non-disclosure of agreements, constituting suppression of facts. The appellant was directed to make a pre-deposit without claiming financial hardship, with compliance waiving the balance of dues during the appeal process. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 21 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=250836