https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365325 Security services qualified for exemption only if they fell within the notification covering lockers, strong rooms or movable property, and the available material was found insufficient to prove that coverage. The extended period of limitation was held unavailable because the early stage of service tax law and the record did not establish mala fides, so the demand was confined to the normal period. Cum-duty benefit was directed to be applied on re-quantification, and penalty was set aside because the dispute was treated as bona fide. en-us Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2018 07:10:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365325 Security services qualified for exemption only if they fell within the notification covering lockers, strong rooms or movable property, and the available material was found insufficient to prove that coverage. The extended period of limitation was held unavailable because the early stage of service tax law and the record did not establish mala fides, so the demand was confined to the normal period. Cum-duty benefit was directed to be applied on re-quantification, and penalty was set aside because the dispute was treated as bona fide. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 28 Jun 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365325