https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439123 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of the appellant, finding the department's classification of services inconsistent. The Tribunal held that the technical knowhow service provided did not fall under Consulting Engineering Service but was classified as Intellectual Property Service since 10.09.2004. Due to the department's varying views and lack of intent to evade on the part of the assessee, the demand under Consulting Engineering Service was dropped. The appeal was allowed based on the merits and limitation period considerations, with consequential relief granted to the appellant. en-us Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 16 Jun 2023 22:36:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439123 The Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad ruled in favor of the appellant, finding the department's classification of services inconsistent. The Tribunal held that the technical knowhow service provided did not fall under Consulting Engineering Service but was classified as Intellectual Property Service since 10.09.2004. Due to the department's varying views and lack of intent to evade on the part of the assessee, the demand under Consulting Engineering Service was dropped. The appeal was allowed based on the merits and limitation period considerations, with consequential relief granted to the appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 02 Feb 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=439123