https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259338 The Tribunal found the appellant liable for service tax on storage and warehousing services provided, but set aside the demand for the extended period and penalty under Section 78. The appellant's activity of supplying gas to another company was deemed to fall within the definition of "Storage and Warehousing Services," despite arguments against a service provider-service receiver relationship. The Tribunal acknowledged the absence of evidence of tax evasion and the appellant's nature as a State Government undertaking, leading to the dismissal of the extended period demand and penalty imposition. en-us Wed, 04 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Mar 2018 15:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259338 The Tribunal found the appellant liable for service tax on storage and warehousing services provided, but set aside the demand for the extended period and penalty under Section 78. The appellant's activity of supplying gas to another company was deemed to fall within the definition of "Storage and Warehousing Services," despite arguments against a service provider-service receiver relationship. The Tribunal acknowledged the absence of evidence of tax evasion and the appellant's nature as a State Government undertaking, leading to the dismissal of the extended period demand and penalty imposition. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Feb 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=259338