https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428761 The appellant's services were initially misclassified under "Commercial or Industrial Construction Service" but correctly classified as "Works Contract Service." The demand for the period up to 01.07.2012 was set aside due to misclassification. Exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST was denied as the work did not qualify. Penalties under Sections 76 and 77 were upheld, while the penalty under Section 78 was set aside. The demand for interest was upheld. The matter was remanded for redetermination of service tax post-01.07.2012 and abatement eligibility. en-us Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 11 Oct 2022 10:18:19 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428761 The appellant's services were initially misclassified under "Commercial or Industrial Construction Service" but correctly classified as "Works Contract Service." The demand for the period up to 01.07.2012 was set aside due to misclassification. Exemption under Notification No. 25/2012-ST was denied as the work did not qualify. Penalties under Sections 76 and 77 were upheld, while the penalty under Section 78 was set aside. The demand for interest was upheld. The matter was remanded for redetermination of service tax post-01.07.2012 and abatement eligibility. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 27 Sep 2022 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=428761