https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766995 CESTAT New Delhi ruled that appellant was liable to pay service tax on selling commission under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) for services received from offshore service provider. Under Section 66A of Finance Act 1994 and Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of Service Tax Rules, recipient of taxable services from foreign providers must discharge service tax liability. However, extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked in revenue neutral situations, and penalties under Sections 77(2) and 78 were set aside. Appeal was partially allowed with demand restricted to normal period only. en-us Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 08 Mar 2025 08:32:01 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766995 CESTAT New Delhi ruled that appellant was liable to pay service tax on selling commission under reverse charge mechanism (RCM) for services received from offshore service provider. Under Section 66A of Finance Act 1994 and Rule 2(1)(d)(iv) of Service Tax Rules, recipient of taxable services from foreign providers must discharge service tax liability. However, extended period of limitation was wrongly invoked in revenue neutral situations, and penalties under Sections 77(2) and 78 were set aside. Appeal was partially allowed with demand restricted to normal period only. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 05 Mar 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766995