https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349693 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, determining that they were not liable for service tax as a Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) agent. The Tribunal found that the appellants did not meet the criteria of a C&F agent as they did not act on behalf of other oil companies but sold LPG owned by them based on agreements. Additionally, the demand notice issued in 2005 was deemed time-barred as the contractual arrangements were disclosed to the Department in 2002. Consequently, the appellants succeeded in their appeal on both the liability for service tax and limitation period issues. en-us Mon, 07 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 24 Oct 2017 10:35:22 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349693 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, determining that they were not liable for service tax as a Clearing and Forwarding (C&F) agent. The Tribunal found that the appellants did not meet the criteria of a C&F agent as they did not act on behalf of other oil companies but sold LPG owned by them based on agreements. Additionally, the demand notice issued in 2005 was deemed time-barred as the contractual arrangements were disclosed to the Department in 2002. Consequently, the appellants succeeded in their appeal on both the liability for service tax and limitation period issues. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 07 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=349693