https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448930 The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the case to the original authority for reevaluation. The appellants challenged the classification of services as 'dredging service' instead of 'works contract service' and argued that service tax liability should be on the subcontractor. The Tribunal found merit in these arguments and ordered a fresh fact-finding on the classification and tax liability issues. The original authority was directed to consider all submissions and provide a personal hearing before making a decision. Appeals by both the assessee-appellants and the Revenue were allowed by way of remand. en-us Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Feb 2024 13:17:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448930 The Tribunal set aside the impugned orders and remanded the case to the original authority for reevaluation. The appellants challenged the classification of services as 'dredging service' instead of 'works contract service' and argued that service tax liability should be on the subcontractor. The Tribunal found merit in these arguments and ordered a fresh fact-finding on the classification and tax liability issues. The original authority was directed to consider all submissions and provide a personal hearing before making a decision. Appeals by both the assessee-appellants and the Revenue were allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 15 Jan 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=448930