https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35 The Court held that the petitioners, an Association providing sound system services, were not liable to pay service tax as they did not fall under the definition of "Pandal or Shamiana contractors" under the Act. The Court emphasized that the legislative intent did not encompass sound service providers in the tax net based on the statutory provisions. The petitioners were exempt from service tax, but liability would apply if they offered other services. The writ petition was allowed without costs, affirming that sound system service providers were not subject to service tax. en-us Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 02 Jul 2008 09:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35 The Court held that the petitioners, an Association providing sound system services, were not liable to pay service tax as they did not fall under the definition of "Pandal or Shamiana contractors" under the Act. The Court emphasized that the legislative intent did not encompass sound service providers in the tax net based on the statutory provisions. The petitioners were exempt from service tax, but liability would apply if they offered other services. The writ petition was allowed without costs, affirming that sound system service providers were not subject to service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 19 Apr 2001 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=35