https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370502 The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the activities undertaken did not fall under "Business Auxiliary Services" or "Cargo Handling Services" for service tax purposes. The Court held that the appellant's activities did not amount to manufacture and were therefore not subject to service tax. The service tax demand for the period 2005-06 was deemed time-barred. The Court also found that while cargo handling services were chargeable to service tax, amounts received for transportation needed to be deducted for calculation purposes. Penalties were adjusted based on these findings. en-us Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Nov 2018 08:38:09 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370502 The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that the activities undertaken did not fall under "Business Auxiliary Services" or "Cargo Handling Services" for service tax purposes. The Court held that the appellant's activities did not amount to manufacture and were therefore not subject to service tax. The service tax demand for the period 2005-06 was deemed time-barred. The Court also found that while cargo handling services were chargeable to service tax, amounts received for transportation needed to be deducted for calculation purposes. Penalties were adjusted based on these findings. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 30 Oct 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370502