https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368120 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against an order confirming a service tax demand, emphasizing that due to retrospective amendments and ambiguity in definitions of taxable services, the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the demand for most services, except for a specific period related to commercial training and coaching service. The Tribunal held that non-payment of tax in such situations cannot be deemed as fraud or collusion, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. en-us Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Oct 2018 08:20:06 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368120 The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal against an order confirming a service tax demand, emphasizing that due to retrospective amendments and ambiguity in definitions of taxable services, the extended period of limitation could not be invoked. The Commissioner (Appeals) had set aside the demand for most services, except for a specific period related to commercial training and coaching service. The Tribunal held that non-payment of tax in such situations cannot be deemed as fraud or collusion, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 11 May 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368120