https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373946 The tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax under works contract service as their activities did not fall under the defined scope. Consequently, they were not entitled to avail CENVAT credit. The demand for interest under Sec.73B was set aside, and penalties under Sec.77 of the Finance Act, 1994 were annulled due to the appellant's disclosure of doubts regarding tax liability. The tribunal confirmed the demand for amounts collected as service tax, set off deposits, and confirmed the reversal of ineligible CENVAT credit. Interest under Rule 14 of CCR was confirmed. The appeal was disposed of accordingly on 16.01.2019. en-us Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 28 Nov 2019 17:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373946 The tribunal held that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax under works contract service as their activities did not fall under the defined scope. Consequently, they were not entitled to avail CENVAT credit. The demand for interest under Sec.73B was set aside, and penalties under Sec.77 of the Finance Act, 1994 were annulled due to the appellant's disclosure of doubts regarding tax liability. The tribunal confirmed the demand for amounts collected as service tax, set off deposits, and confirmed the reversal of ineligible CENVAT credit. Interest under Rule 14 of CCR was confirmed. The appeal was disposed of accordingly on 16.01.2019. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 16 Jan 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=373946