https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365335 The appellant, involved in treating water for a thermal power station, was in dispute with the revenue regarding the classification of services under Business Auxiliary Services. The appellant's argument, supported by a Tribunal decision, emphasized that no tax liability should arise for services provided before 16.06.2005, as the relevant amendment came into effect after the period in question. The judgment favored the appellant by noting the revenue's demand was time-barred, lacking evidence of malafide intent, thus disallowing the extended period for revenue. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the significance of evidence and legal timelines in tax matters. en-us Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 16 Aug 2018 07:18:58 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365335 The appellant, involved in treating water for a thermal power station, was in dispute with the revenue regarding the classification of services under Business Auxiliary Services. The appellant's argument, supported by a Tribunal decision, emphasized that no tax liability should arise for services provided before 16.06.2005, as the relevant amendment came into effect after the period in question. The judgment favored the appellant by noting the revenue's demand was time-barred, lacking evidence of malafide intent, thus disallowing the extended period for revenue. Consequently, the impugned order was set aside, and the appeal was allowed in favor of the appellant, emphasizing the significance of evidence and legal timelines in tax matters. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=365335