https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773061 The Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order confirming service tax demand, interest, and penalties against appellants providing manpower recruitment services. The authority failed to adequately examine whether appellants had discharged their 25% service tax liability under the split payment mechanism, improperly classified services as 'Storage and Warehousing' and 'Cleaning Service' instead of 'Manpower Recruitment Agency and Supply Service', and did not consider appellants' claim for protection under Section 73(3) benefits for pre-SCN payment. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with directions to conduct detailed factual inquiry, provide personal hearing, and address all contentions comprehensively rather than relying solely on mechanical comparison of Form 26AS and ST-3 returns. en-us Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 20 Jun 2025 10:24:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773061 The Tribunal set aside the adjudicating authority's order confirming service tax demand, interest, and penalties against appellants providing manpower recruitment services. The authority failed to adequately examine whether appellants had discharged their 25% service tax liability under the split payment mechanism, improperly classified services as 'Storage and Warehousing' and 'Cleaning Service' instead of 'Manpower Recruitment Agency and Supply Service', and did not consider appellants' claim for protection under Section 73(3) benefits for pre-SCN payment. The matter was remanded for fresh adjudication with directions to conduct detailed factual inquiry, provide personal hearing, and address all contentions comprehensively rather than relying solely on mechanical comparison of Form 26AS and ST-3 returns. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 09 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=773061