https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280045 The Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's demand for evasion of Service Tax against the appellant, who provided various services. The Tribunal found the appellant compliant with tax payments, with separate agreements for different services and evidence of tax payment by clients under the reverse charge mechanism. Relying on the reconciliation statement and ST-3 returns, the Tribunal concluded that the tax levy lacked justification. Emphasizing the appellant's adherence to tax payment timelines and separate service agreements, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting consequential benefits. en-us Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 17 Apr 2019 20:52:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280045 The Tribunal set aside the Adjudicating Authority's demand for evasion of Service Tax against the appellant, who provided various services. The Tribunal found the appellant compliant with tax payments, with separate agreements for different services and evidence of tax payment by clients under the reverse charge mechanism. Relying on the reconciliation statement and ST-3 returns, the Tribunal concluded that the tax levy lacked justification. Emphasizing the appellant's adherence to tax payment timelines and separate service agreements, the Tribunal allowed the appeal, granting consequential benefits. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 18 Jul 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=280045