https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750888 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that appellant was liable to pay service tax on management, maintenance and repair services. The tribunal sustained demand for services to construction company, rejecting sub-contractor exemption argument based on precedent. However, demand for services to SEZ unit was set aside. Extended limitation period was correctly invoked due to suppression of service value. The matter was remitted for recalculation treating invoices as cum-tax receipts where service tax wasn't separately shown, with corresponding adjustments to interest and penalty. en-us Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 02 Apr 2024 18:19:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750888 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that appellant was liable to pay service tax on management, maintenance and repair services. The tribunal sustained demand for services to construction company, rejecting sub-contractor exemption argument based on precedent. However, demand for services to SEZ unit was set aside. Extended limitation period was correctly invoked due to suppression of service value. The matter was remitted for recalculation treating invoices as cum-tax receipts where service tax wasn't separately shown, with corresponding adjustments to interest and penalty. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=750888