https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177716 The non-availment condition in Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. applies to inputs, not input services, so denial of 67% abatement on the basis of credit taken on input services was a misreading of the notification. Services rendered from 1-6-2007 were prima facie classifiable as works contract service under the then-applicable scheme, making the re-classification legally supportable at the stay stage. While eligibility for the composition scheme on continuing projects required further examination, the tax demand, interest and penalties were treated as prima facie vulnerable, and the allegations of suppression and wilful misstatement were weakened. On that basis, a case was made out for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal. en-us Tue, 22 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 16 Jan 2016 08:28:13 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177716 The non-availment condition in Notification No. 1/2006-S.T. applies to inputs, not input services, so denial of 67% abatement on the basis of credit taken on input services was a misreading of the notification. Services rendered from 1-6-2007 were prima facie classifiable as works contract service under the then-applicable scheme, making the re-classification legally supportable at the stay stage. While eligibility for the composition scheme on continuing projects required further examination, the tax demand, interest and penalties were treated as prima facie vulnerable, and the allegations of suppression and wilful misstatement were weakened. On that basis, a case was made out for waiver of pre-deposit and stay of recovery pending appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 22 Jul 2014 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=177716