https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341312 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent on certain aspects, such as services provided to SEZ units and reimbursements for stationary expenses, stating that no service tax liability arose in these instances. However, further clarification was deemed necessary regarding the service tax liability on job-work. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to reassess the cum-tax benefit and job-work issue, considering the respondent's submissions. Penalties and interest liabilities were also instructed to be re-evaluated. The appeal was disposed of with these directions. en-us Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 06 Apr 2017 07:31:32 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341312 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the respondent on certain aspects, such as services provided to SEZ units and reimbursements for stationary expenses, stating that no service tax liability arose in these instances. However, further clarification was deemed necessary regarding the service tax liability on job-work. The Tribunal directed the adjudicating authority to reassess the cum-tax benefit and job-work issue, considering the respondent's submissions. Penalties and interest liabilities were also instructed to be re-evaluated. The appeal was disposed of with these directions. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 07 Mar 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=341312