https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264664 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demand for interest on alleged delay in discharging service tax liability for outstanding amounts from associated enterprises before the specified amendment date was not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized that the explanation added to Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 could not have retrospective effect. Therefore, the appeal was allowed without requiring a pre-deposit, and the case was scheduled for final hearing based on established legal interpretation, providing a comprehensive analysis of the statutory provisions and case law involved. en-us Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 29 Sep 2015 17:08:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264664 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the demand for interest on alleged delay in discharging service tax liability for outstanding amounts from associated enterprises before the specified amendment date was not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized that the explanation added to Rule 6(1) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994 could not have retrospective effect. Therefore, the appeal was allowed without requiring a pre-deposit, and the case was scheduled for final hearing based on established legal interpretation, providing a comprehensive analysis of the statutory provisions and case law involved. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 28 Apr 2015 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=264664