https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361182 The Tribunal upheld the classification of service under 'works contract service' instead of 'erection, installation and commissioning service' for the appellant. It found that the installation of street lights, although related to road construction, did not change the classification. The Tribunal also set aside the demand for the extended period due to the appellant's declaration of exempted service value in the ST-3 return, emphasizing the importance of accurate value declarations to avoid limitations on demands. The appellant's argument of the order exceeding the show cause notice's scope was rejected, and the ROM application was partly allowed based on these findings. en-us Tue, 08 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 01 Jun 2018 08:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361182 The Tribunal upheld the classification of service under 'works contract service' instead of 'erection, installation and commissioning service' for the appellant. It found that the installation of street lights, although related to road construction, did not change the classification. The Tribunal also set aside the demand for the extended period due to the appellant's declaration of exempted service value in the ST-3 return, emphasizing the importance of accurate value declarations to avoid limitations on demands. The appellant's argument of the order exceeding the show cause notice's scope was rejected, and the ROM application was partly allowed based on these findings. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 08 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=361182