https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32719 An exemption or concessional notification cannot be denied merely because hotel bills are not in the assessee's name if the surrounding facts otherwise support entitlement, though supporting evidence may still need verification. Amounts received for services rendered before the levy of service tax on tour operator service were not taxable merely because receipt occurred during the disputed period. Advance receipts linked to an event later held in January 2000 also required factual verification before taxability could be determined. The train-ticket component, eligibility for Notification No. 39/97, and cum-tax benefit depended on evidence and correct characterisation of the package tour, and were therefore sent back for fresh adjudication. en-us Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 25 Apr 2014 10:20:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32719 An exemption or concessional notification cannot be denied merely because hotel bills are not in the assessee's name if the surrounding facts otherwise support entitlement, though supporting evidence may still need verification. Amounts received for services rendered before the levy of service tax on tour operator service were not taxable merely because receipt occurred during the disputed period. Advance receipts linked to an event later held in January 2000 also required factual verification before taxability could be determined. The train-ticket component, eligibility for Notification No. 39/97, and cum-tax benefit depended on evidence and correct characterisation of the package tour, and were therefore sent back for fresh adjudication. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Mar 2009 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=32719