https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442069 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand for Service Tax and penalties. It held that the services provided did not fall under "Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency" classification. The inclusion of salary, EPF, and ESI in the taxable value was rejected based on previous court decisions. The appellants were considered "pure agents," and reimbursable expenses were not included in the assessable value. The issue of taxability before 01.05.2006 was deemed redundant. The extended period for demand was not applicable due to lack of evidence of deliberate suppression. en-us Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 23 Aug 2023 14:59:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442069 The Tribunal ruled in favor of the appellants, setting aside the demand for Service Tax and penalties. It held that the services provided did not fall under "Manpower Recruitment or Supply Agency" classification. The inclusion of salary, EPF, and ESI in the taxable value was rejected based on previous court decisions. The appellants were considered "pure agents," and reimbursable expenses were not included in the assessable value. The issue of taxability before 01.05.2006 was deemed redundant. The extended period for demand was not applicable due to lack of evidence of deliberate suppression. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 21 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=442069