https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348737 Jurisdiction was upheld because the taxable activity was carried out within the Guntur Commissionerate, and the appellant had not obtained centralized registration covering all relevant locations. The services were also classified as mining service, not cargo handling service, because the loading, transportation, crushing-related movement and unloading of limestone were performed wholly within the mining area and were integrally connected with mining operations. On that basis, the text states that the demand, interest and penalties could not be sustained; the limitation issue was not examined. en-us Thu, 07 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Sep 2017 07:08:56 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348737 Jurisdiction was upheld because the taxable activity was carried out within the Guntur Commissionerate, and the appellant had not obtained centralized registration covering all relevant locations. The services were also classified as mining service, not cargo handling service, because the loading, transportation, crushing-related movement and unloading of limestone were performed wholly within the mining area and were integrally connected with mining operations. On that basis, the text states that the demand, interest and penalties could not be sustained; the limitation issue was not examined. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 07 Sep 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=348737