https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298421 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the demand for service tax under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) for the period before the introduction of Business Support Service (BSS) was not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the distinct nature of the two categories and rejected the department's claim to retrospectively classify the activity under BAS. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the appellant's activity fell under BSS based on the amended definition, absolving them from liability under BAS. The Tribunal also ruled in favor of the appellant on the grounds of limitation, setting aside the demand for service tax. en-us Fri, 15 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Nov 2021 07:07:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298421 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that the demand for service tax under Business Auxiliary Service (BAS) for the period before the introduction of Business Support Service (BSS) was not sustainable. The Tribunal emphasized the distinct nature of the two categories and rejected the department's claim to retrospectively classify the activity under BAS. Additionally, the Tribunal found that the appellant's activity fell under BSS based on the amended definition, absolving them from liability under BAS. The Tribunal also ruled in favor of the appellant on the grounds of limitation, setting aside the demand for service tax. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 15 Jan 2021 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=298421