https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363812 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Order-in-Original that demanded Service Tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism. The decision highlighted the lack of evidence to support the claim that payments were solely for Business Auxiliary Service, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and thorough assessment of agreements in tax matters. The appellant was granted consequential relief, with the tribunal concluding that the demand for Service Tax was not justified. en-us Thu, 03 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Jul 2018 07:40:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363812 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside the Order-in-Original that demanded Service Tax under Reverse Charge Mechanism. The decision highlighted the lack of evidence to support the claim that payments were solely for Business Auxiliary Service, emphasizing the importance of proper documentation and thorough assessment of agreements in tax matters. The appellant was granted consequential relief, with the tribunal concluding that the demand for Service Tax was not justified. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 03 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=363812