https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369684 The appeal was partly allowed. The demand for including reimbursements in the assessable value for services provided to ICICI Bank was upheld, while the demand under Business Auxiliary Services for services provided to Tata Teleservices was not upheld. The extended period of limitation was applicable, and the penalty under Section 76 was set aside, with the penalty under Section 78 revised accordingly. en-us Thu, 18 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 12 Jun 2019 09:52:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369684 The appeal was partly allowed. The demand for including reimbursements in the assessable value for services provided to ICICI Bank was upheld, while the demand under Business Auxiliary Services for services provided to Tata Teleservices was not upheld. The extended period of limitation was applicable, and the penalty under Section 76 was set aside, with the penalty under Section 78 revised accordingly. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 18 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=369684