https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342662 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order upholding a demand for service tax under maintenance and repairing service. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between one-time repair activities and maintenance contracts, noting that without a maintenance contract or agreement, one-time repair activities should not be taxed as maintenance or repair service. Citing previous decisions, the Tribunal concluded that liability under maintenance or repair service does not apply to repair activity in terms of rate contract work order. The judgment underscored the importance of clarifying the scope of work to determine service tax liability accurately. en-us Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 10 Nov 2017 10:42:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342662 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT New Delhi ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the order upholding a demand for service tax under maintenance and repairing service. The Tribunal emphasized the distinction between one-time repair activities and maintenance contracts, noting that without a maintenance contract or agreement, one-time repair activities should not be taxed as maintenance or repair service. Citing previous decisions, the Tribunal concluded that liability under maintenance or repair service does not apply to repair activity in terms of rate contract work order. The judgment underscored the importance of clarifying the scope of work to determine service tax liability accurately. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 05 Apr 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=342662