https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427855 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that they were not liable for service tax under 'commercial training or coaching' service as MAAC had already paid the tax. The Tribunal emphasized the revenue-sharing arrangement between the parties and concluded that the appellant acted as an instrument in the training program managed by MAAC. The decision was based on previous rulings and the nature of the revenue-sharing agreement, leading to the setting aside of the Commissioner (Appeals) order in favor of the appellant. en-us Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 19 Sep 2022 09:34:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427855 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, holding that they were not liable for service tax under 'commercial training or coaching' service as MAAC had already paid the tax. The Tribunal emphasized the revenue-sharing arrangement between the parties and concluded that the appellant acted as an instrument in the training program managed by MAAC. The decision was based on previous rulings and the nature of the revenue-sharing agreement, leading to the setting aside of the Commissioner (Appeals) order in favor of the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 12 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=427855