https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351551 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The decision was based on the interpretation of legal provisions and previous judgments, determining the liability to pay service tax under the Franchise service agreement. The appellant's arguments regarding the timing of liability under the reverse charge mechanism and the applicability of the Franchise service definition were pivotal in the outcome. en-us Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 28 Nov 2017 07:37:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351551 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the impugned order and allowing the appeal with consequential relief. The decision was based on the interpretation of legal provisions and previous judgments, determining the liability to pay service tax under the Franchise service agreement. The appellant's arguments regarding the timing of liability under the reverse charge mechanism and the applicability of the Franchise service definition were pivotal in the outcome. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 21 Aug 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351551