https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368693 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on all issues. The demand for service tax under 'commercial training or coaching services' was set aside as the training provided was mandatory and recognized by law. The demand for service tax on the import of 'intellectual property service' was also dismissed, as the transaction was considered a sales transaction, not a service transaction. The denial of Cenvat credit was found to be incorrect due to procedural lapses. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was allowed, penalties were set aside, and the judgment was pronounced on 3.10.2018. en-us Wed, 03 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Oct 2018 05:24:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368693 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant on all issues. The demand for service tax under 'commercial training or coaching services' was set aside as the training provided was mandatory and recognized by law. The demand for service tax on the import of 'intellectual property service' was also dismissed, as the transaction was considered a sales transaction, not a service transaction. The denial of Cenvat credit was found to be incorrect due to procedural lapses. The extended period of limitation was deemed inapplicable. The appeal was allowed, penalties were set aside, and the judgment was pronounced on 3.10.2018. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 03 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368693