https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382564 The appellant successfully appealed against a demand for service tax related to Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services, as the liability under the reverse charge mechanism was set aside due to the absence of a consignment note. For the liability concerning 'Renting of immovable property services', confusion arising from tax regulation changes led to the Department's error in invoking an extended period of limitation. The Tribunal found no malafide intent on the part of the appellant and deemed the demand unsustainable for the period up to May 2009. However, liability for 2009-10 was upheld, with the penalty being deemed unwarranted, resulting in the appeal being partly allowed with consequential benefits. en-us Tue, 25 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 06 Jul 2019 07:57:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382564 The appellant successfully appealed against a demand for service tax related to Goods Transport Agency (GTA) services, as the liability under the reverse charge mechanism was set aside due to the absence of a consignment note. For the liability concerning 'Renting of immovable property services', confusion arising from tax regulation changes led to the Department's error in invoking an extended period of limitation. The Tribunal found no malafide intent on the part of the appellant and deemed the demand unsustainable for the period up to May 2009. However, liability for 2009-10 was upheld, with the penalty being deemed unwarranted, resulting in the appeal being partly allowed with consequential benefits. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 25 Jun 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=382564