https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414 The Tribunal dismissed the department's appeal against the Order-in-Appeal that set aside the service tax demand on the engineering firm. The Commissioner (Appeals) had concluded that the firm was not liable to pay service tax as the work contracts encompassed various activities, including design and engineering, for which service tax cannot be charged. The Tribunal found the issue aligned with a previous Supreme Court decision and upheld the Order-in-Appeal, emphasizing that separate billing for different activities was for convenience only. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the firm's non-liability for service tax. en-us Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 26 Jun 2020 13:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414 The Tribunal dismissed the department's appeal against the Order-in-Appeal that set aside the service tax demand on the engineering firm. The Commissioner (Appeals) had concluded that the firm was not liable to pay service tax as the work contracts encompassed various activities, including design and engineering, for which service tax cannot be charged. The Tribunal found the issue aligned with a previous Supreme Court decision and upheld the Order-in-Appeal, emphasizing that separate billing for different activities was for convenience only. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the firm's non-liability for service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 08 Feb 2006 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=414