https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388538 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the service tax demand under 'Mandap Keeper's Services' was not applicable due to the use of another entity's brand name. The demand for service tax from 2009-10 to 2014-15 was limited to the normal period of limitation, and penalties were set aside as there was no evidence of malice. The matter was remanded for recalculation within the limitation period, with all penalties being waived. en-us Thu, 25 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 18 Nov 2019 08:37:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388538 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the service tax demand under 'Mandap Keeper's Services' was not applicable due to the use of another entity's brand name. The demand for service tax from 2009-10 to 2014-15 was limited to the normal period of limitation, and penalties were set aside as there was no evidence of malice. The matter was remanded for recalculation within the limitation period, with all penalties being waived. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 25 Jul 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=388538