https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763721 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal in part. The tribunal set aside demands of Rs.44,83,913/- under GTA service as the recipient was liable for service tax under reverse charge mechanism, and Rs.1,07,40,970/- under business auxiliary service as the appellant qualified for exemption regardless of work location. The demand of Rs.3,43,641/- under renting of immovable property service was upheld only for normal limitation period due to prevalent confusion during the relevant period. All penalties under sections 77 and 78 were set aside as no suppression of facts was established. en-us Wed, 04 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:00:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763721 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal in part. The tribunal set aside demands of Rs.44,83,913/- under GTA service as the recipient was liable for service tax under reverse charge mechanism, and Rs.1,07,40,970/- under business auxiliary service as the appellant qualified for exemption regardless of work location. The demand of Rs.3,43,641/- under renting of immovable property service was upheld only for normal limitation period due to prevalent confusion during the relevant period. All penalties under sections 77 and 78 were set aside as no suppression of facts was established. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763721