https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30397 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding the demand for service tax exceeding Rs. 1.7 crores invalid. The tribunal determined that the misinterpretation of the applicability of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994, led to an erroneous tax liability under Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, the tribunal granted a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay of recovery for the adjudged dues, providing relief to the appellants in the disputed service tax matter. en-us Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 25 Aug 2008 00:00:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30397 The appellate tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding the demand for service tax exceeding Rs. 1.7 crores invalid. The tribunal determined that the misinterpretation of the applicability of Section 66A of the Finance Act, 1994, led to an erroneous tax liability under Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Consequently, the tribunal granted a waiver of pre-deposit and a stay of recovery for the adjudged dues, providing relief to the appellants in the disputed service tax matter. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 29 Feb 2008 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=30397