https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337576 The Tribunal remanded the case to the Original Authority for a fresh decision on the appellant's service classification as an Interior Decorator, emphasizing the need to assess the actual activities performed. The best judgment method used for calculating service tax liability was deemed legally unsustainable, requiring a reevaluation with proper income details. The issue of the composite nature of work orders and the applicability of service tax were referred back for review. The Tribunal deferred decisions on penalty under Section 78 and the time bar for demand, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the case for further examination. en-us Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 14 Feb 2017 11:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337576 The Tribunal remanded the case to the Original Authority for a fresh decision on the appellant's service classification as an Interior Decorator, emphasizing the need to assess the actual activities performed. The best judgment method used for calculating service tax liability was deemed legally unsustainable, requiring a reevaluation with proper income details. The issue of the composite nature of work orders and the applicability of service tax were referred back for review. The Tribunal deferred decisions on penalty under Section 78 and the time bar for demand, setting aside the impugned order and remanding the case for further examination. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 06 Jan 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=337576