https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360563 The judgment favored the appellant in an appeal against the rejection of service tax payment on security services under the Reverse Charge Mechanism. The court held that demanding service tax from the service receiver after the service provider had already paid the tax constituted double taxation, which was legally impermissible. The order rejecting the appeal was set aside, emphasizing that once the service tax had been fully paid by the service provider, demanding it again from the appellant was not allowed under the law. en-us Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 19 May 2018 08:29:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360563 The judgment favored the appellant in an appeal against the rejection of service tax payment on security services under the Reverse Charge Mechanism. The court held that demanding service tax from the service receiver after the service provider had already paid the tax constituted double taxation, which was legally impermissible. The order rejecting the appeal was set aside, emphasizing that once the service tax had been fully paid by the service provider, demanding it again from the appellant was not allowed under the law. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 11 Apr 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=360563