https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380375 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside all four impugned Orders-in-Original. It held that the extended period of limitation was not justified as the appellant regularly filed ST-3 returns without incomplete or incorrect information, negating any willful default. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the service tax calculation by the Original Adjudicating Authority and supported the appellant's argument that separate components in the contract allowed for individual classification and tax payment, ultimately concluding that the appellant complied with the composition scheme for service tax payment. en-us Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 20 May 2019 07:02:08 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380375 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, setting aside all four impugned Orders-in-Original. It held that the extended period of limitation was not justified as the appellant regularly filed ST-3 returns without incomplete or incorrect information, negating any willful default. The Tribunal found discrepancies in the service tax calculation by the Original Adjudicating Authority and supported the appellant's argument that separate components in the contract allowed for individual classification and tax payment, ultimately concluding that the appellant complied with the composition scheme for service tax payment. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 16 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=380375