https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438004 Reverse charge service tax liability depends on the actual service-provider and service-recipient relationship under section 68(1) of the Finance Act and Notification No. 30/2012-ST. Where a contractor was engaged directly by the Tripura Housing and Construction Board and rendered works contract services only to that Board, the appellant, as the eventual user and project funder, was not the recipient of the service. The absence of any direct contractual nexus between the appellant and the contractor meant reverse charge could not be fastened on the appellant. On those facts, the demand and the order confirming liability against the appellant could not be sustained. en-us Thu, 18 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 19 May 2023 22:49:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438004 Reverse charge service tax liability depends on the actual service-provider and service-recipient relationship under section 68(1) of the Finance Act and Notification No. 30/2012-ST. Where a contractor was engaged directly by the Tripura Housing and Construction Board and rendered works contract services only to that Board, the appellant, as the eventual user and project funder, was not the recipient of the service. The absence of any direct contractual nexus between the appellant and the contractor meant reverse charge could not be fastened on the appellant. On those facts, the demand and the order confirming liability against the appellant could not be sustained. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 18 May 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=438004