https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371488 The appellant, engaged in shoe manufacturing and exports, faced service tax demands on various services. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that procedural lapses cannot deny substantive benefits under Notification No. 18/2009-ST. Business Exhibition Services held abroad were non-taxable in India, and Technical Inspection and Certification Services lacked evidence for sustainability. The demand for GTA services was rejected due to insufficient evidence. The demand period exceeded the limitation period, and as no suppression or misstatement was proven, the demands were not sustained. The impugned order was set aside with relief to the appellant. en-us Tue, 27 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 05 Dec 2018 06:36:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371488 The appellant, engaged in shoe manufacturing and exports, faced service tax demands on various services. The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, stating that procedural lapses cannot deny substantive benefits under Notification No. 18/2009-ST. Business Exhibition Services held abroad were non-taxable in India, and Technical Inspection and Certification Services lacked evidence for sustainability. The demand for GTA services was rejected due to insufficient evidence. The demand period exceeded the limitation period, and as no suppression or misstatement was proven, the demands were not sustained. The impugned order was set aside with relief to the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 27 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=371488