https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364953 The court quashed the show-cause notice dated October 16, 2007, finding it lacked jurisdiction as the petitioner's services did not constitute photography services under the Finance Act, 1994. The court ruled that the petitioner's activities did not fall under taxable services related to photography, concluding that the preparation of Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) did not attract Service Tax. The writ petition challenging the notice was allowed, with the court ordering the refund of deposits made by the petitioner along with statutory interest within four weeks. en-us Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 02 Feb 2019 12:45:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364953 The court quashed the show-cause notice dated October 16, 2007, finding it lacked jurisdiction as the petitioner's services did not constitute photography services under the Finance Act, 1994. The court ruled that the petitioner's activities did not fall under taxable services related to photography, concluding that the preparation of Electoral Photo Identity Cards (EPIC) did not attract Service Tax. The writ petition challenging the notice was allowed, with the court ordering the refund of deposits made by the petitioner along with statutory interest within four weeks. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 03 Aug 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=364953