https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392940 The tribunal upheld the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Commissionerate over transactions related to the Mumbai address, classified services from AsiaSat as "Business Support Services," determined that the agreement did not constitute a deemed sale under Article 366(29A)(d), dropped the demand for three invoices related to Noida, upheld the extended period of limitation invocation, and upheld the imposition of interest and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. Appeal No. ST/85354/2015 was dismissed, while Appeal No. ST/85355/2015 was partially allowed with modifications reducing the demand and penalty related to Noida invoices. en-us Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 03 Mar 2020 10:58:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392940 The tribunal upheld the jurisdiction of the Mumbai Commissionerate over transactions related to the Mumbai address, classified services from AsiaSat as "Business Support Services," determined that the agreement did not constitute a deemed sale under Article 366(29A)(d), dropped the demand for three invoices related to Noida, upheld the extended period of limitation invocation, and upheld the imposition of interest and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. Appeal No. ST/85354/2015 was dismissed, while Appeal No. ST/85355/2015 was partially allowed with modifications reducing the demand and penalty related to Noida invoices. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 26 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=392940