https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366649 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that their primary service of providing cash van services, which included security guards, did not constitute 'security services' for the purpose of Service Tax. The demand for Service Tax under the category of 'security service' was deemed unsustainable, and the impugned orders were set aside. Consequently, the appellants were not liable to pay the differential Service Tax, and no penalties were imposed. The appeals were allowed, providing relief to the appellants. en-us Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Aug 2019 12:27:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366649 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, finding that their primary service of providing cash van services, which included security guards, did not constitute 'security services' for the purpose of Service Tax. The demand for Service Tax under the category of 'security service' was deemed unsustainable, and the impugned orders were set aside. Consequently, the appellants were not liable to pay the differential Service Tax, and no penalties were imposed. The appeals were allowed, providing relief to the appellants. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 27 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=366649