https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373086 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Original that confirmed the demand for payment. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing welding products, argued they continued to pay 75% of the liability even after an amendment requiring 100%, citing lack of knowledge and revenue neutrality. The Tribunal found the Department's claim of short payment unsubstantiated, noting the appellant's consistent payments and evidence of full payment during the disputed period. The Tribunal held the Department wrongly applied the extended limitation period, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 12 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 06 Jan 2019 06:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373086 The Tribunal allowed the appeal, setting aside the Order-in-Original that confirmed the demand for payment. The appellant, engaged in manufacturing welding products, argued they continued to pay 75% of the liability even after an amendment requiring 100%, citing lack of knowledge and revenue neutrality. The Tribunal found the Department's claim of short payment unsubstantiated, noting the appellant's consistent payments and evidence of full payment during the disputed period. The Tribunal held the Department wrongly applied the extended limitation period, ultimately ruling in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 12 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373086