https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756314 CESTAT Kolkata held that service tax demand under Business Auxiliary Services was unsustainable as the Show Cause Notice failed to specify the relevant sub-section of Section 65(19). The tribunal relied on precedent establishing that demands without specifying which of the seven services under Section 65(19) applies cannot be sustained. Regarding Authorized Service Station Service, the tribunal found no service tax payable on reimbursements for after-sale services already included in excise duty assessable value, citing SC precedent. Extended limitation period was rejected as no suppression of facts was established, being standard dealer practice. Appeal allowed, demands set aside. en-us Tue, 30 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 01 Aug 2024 08:31:31 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756314 CESTAT Kolkata held that service tax demand under Business Auxiliary Services was unsustainable as the Show Cause Notice failed to specify the relevant sub-section of Section 65(19). The tribunal relied on precedent establishing that demands without specifying which of the seven services under Section 65(19) applies cannot be sustained. Regarding Authorized Service Station Service, the tribunal found no service tax payable on reimbursements for after-sale services already included in excise duty assessable value, citing SC precedent. Extended limitation period was rejected as no suppression of facts was established, being standard dealer practice. Appeal allowed, demands set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 30 Jul 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=756314