https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87342 CESTAT held that the consortium's services constituted works contract service under Section 65A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal rejected exemption claims under Notifications 11/2010-ST, 32/2010-ST, and 45/2010-ST, finding they did not apply to EPC contract services. The extended period of limitation was not invoked due to bonafide belief and interpretational confusion. Penalties were set aside considering the appellant's government undertaking status. The appeal was partly allowed, upholding service tax classification while providing relief on limitation and penalties. en-us Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:40:01 +0530 Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:40:03 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87342 CESTAT held that the consortium's services constituted works contract service under Section 65A of the Finance Act, 1994. The tribunal rejected exemption claims under Notifications 11/2010-ST, 32/2010-ST, and 45/2010-ST, finding they did not apply to EPC contract services. The extended period of limitation was not invoked due to bonafide belief and interpretational confusion. Penalties were set aside considering the appellant's government undertaking status. The appeal was partly allowed, upholding service tax classification while providing relief on limitation and penalties. Highlights Service Tax Fri, 11 Apr 2025 08:40:01 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/highlights?id=87342