https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262150 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (A) for a proper decision on the legal issues raised by the appellant. The appellant's challenges regarding the incorrect application of Section 65(68) of the Finance Act 1994, failure to consider Service Tax Rules, 1994, justification of the extended period of limitation, imposition of penalties under sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act 1994, and non-compliance with Rule 5 of the Central Excise Appeals Rules 2001 were considered valid, leading to the favorable outcome for the appellant. en-us Mon, 25 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 03 Aug 2015 15:30:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262150 The Tribunal set aside the impugned order and remanded the matter back to the Commissioner (A) for a proper decision on the legal issues raised by the appellant. The appellant's challenges regarding the incorrect application of Section 65(68) of the Finance Act 1994, failure to consider Service Tax Rules, 1994, justification of the extended period of limitation, imposition of penalties under sections 76, 77, and 78 of the Finance Act 1994, and non-compliance with Rule 5 of the Central Excise Appeals Rules 2001 were considered valid, leading to the favorable outcome for the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 25 May 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=262150