https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258615 The court upheld the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent to confirm the demand of service tax and penalty on the State Government department, based on Parliament's legislative competence. The petitioner was directed to pursue an appeal before the CESTAT to raise specific arguments not previously addressed. The court clarified the application of pre-deposit requirements for appeals in light of recent amendments to the Finance Act, granting a stay on recovery proceedings for one month to allow the petitioner to file an appeal with an application for waiver of pre-deposit. en-us Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 11 Jun 2016 11:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258615 The court upheld the jurisdiction of the 2nd respondent to confirm the demand of service tax and penalty on the State Government department, based on Parliament's legislative competence. The petitioner was directed to pursue an appeal before the CESTAT to raise specific arguments not previously addressed. The court clarified the application of pre-deposit requirements for appeals in light of recent amendments to the Finance Act, granting a stay on recovery proceedings for one month to allow the petitioner to file an appeal with an application for waiver of pre-deposit. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 31 Mar 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=258615