https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351761 The Tribunal allowed the Appellant to adjust the excess service tax paid in subsequent quarters towards their tax liability. The Tribunal held that the Appellant's actions were in compliance with Rule 6(4A) & 6(4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, despite procedural lapses. Additionally, the demand notice issued by the Revenue was deemed time-barred, as the Appellant had included the excess amount in their subsequent returns. By analyzing precedent cases, the Tribunal concluded that the adjustment made by the Appellant was lawful and consistent with established legal principles, ultimately ruling in favor of the Appellant. en-us Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 09 Feb 2018 17:06:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351761 The Tribunal allowed the Appellant to adjust the excess service tax paid in subsequent quarters towards their tax liability. The Tribunal held that the Appellant's actions were in compliance with Rule 6(4A) & 6(4B) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, despite procedural lapses. Additionally, the demand notice issued by the Revenue was deemed time-barred, as the Appellant had included the excess amount in their subsequent returns. By analyzing precedent cases, the Tribunal concluded that the adjustment made by the Appellant was lawful and consistent with established legal principles, ultimately ruling in favor of the Appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=351761