https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384838 The appeal was filed to set aside the order confirming the demand of service tax, interest, and penalty imposed by the Commissioner. The appellant, a sub-contractor, believed the main contractors were liable for the service tax and had paid it. The Commissioner upheld the demand, stating the appellant was liable to pay service tax. The Tribunal remitted the matter to the Commissioner to calculate the service tax liability within the standard limitation period without invoking the extended period, considering the lack of wilful suppression of facts and conflicting Tribunal decisions. en-us Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Aug 2019 06:37:59 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384838 The appeal was filed to set aside the order confirming the demand of service tax, interest, and penalty imposed by the Commissioner. The appellant, a sub-contractor, believed the main contractors were liable for the service tax and had paid it. The Commissioner upheld the demand, stating the appellant was liable to pay service tax. The Tribunal remitted the matter to the Commissioner to calculate the service tax liability within the standard limitation period without invoking the extended period, considering the lack of wilful suppression of facts and conflicting Tribunal decisions. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 01 Aug 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=384838