https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254073 A serious prima facie question arose over the authority to proceed with the proposed audit communication, given the challenge to Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and the conflicting High Court views on that rule. The Court also noted that reliance on Regulation 169 of the Regulations of Audit and Accounts, 2007 and the cited Supreme Court observations did not, at this stage, clearly establish power to conduct the special audit. Interim protection was therefore granted, and the respondents were restrained from taking further action on the impugned audit communication. en-us Wed, 03 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 18 Feb 2017 16:51:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254073 A serious prima facie question arose over the authority to proceed with the proposed audit communication, given the challenge to Rule 5A of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 and the conflicting High Court views on that rule. The Court also noted that reliance on Regulation 169 of the Regulations of Audit and Accounts, 2007 and the cited Supreme Court observations did not, at this stage, clearly establish power to conduct the special audit. Interim protection was therefore granted, and the respondents were restrained from taking further action on the impugned audit communication. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 03 Dec 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=254073