https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350421 The Tribunal held that each sub-contractor is independently liable for service tax, rejecting the argument of double levy. The issue of services provided within the SEZ was remanded for further examination. The nature of services was classified as input services rather than manpower supply. Benefits under specific notifications were remanded for proper examination. The situation was found to be non-revenue neutral due to the availing of certain benefits. The appellants were directed to pay service tax, and the matter was remanded for re-examination and quantification of the demand. en-us Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 05 Dec 2017 10:07:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350421 The Tribunal held that each sub-contractor is independently liable for service tax, rejecting the argument of double levy. The issue of services provided within the SEZ was remanded for further examination. The nature of services was classified as input services rather than manpower supply. Benefits under specific notifications were remanded for proper examination. The situation was found to be non-revenue neutral due to the availing of certain benefits. The appellants were directed to pay service tax, and the matter was remanded for re-examination and quantification of the demand. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 30 Oct 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=350421