https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774493 CESTAT Bangalore held that appellant's activities including unloading, hand shunting, painting, and marking for identification constituted cargo handling services liable to service tax. However, considering appellant's bona fide belief regarding non-liability and absence of intentional evasion, extended limitation period was not applicable. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside. Service tax demand was limited to normal period. Matter remanded to original authority for redetermining service tax amount with interest for normal period. Appeal allowed by way of remand. en-us Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Jul 2025 18:22:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774493 CESTAT Bangalore held that appellant's activities including unloading, hand shunting, painting, and marking for identification constituted cargo handling services liable to service tax. However, considering appellant's bona fide belief regarding non-liability and absence of intentional evasion, extended limitation period was not applicable. Penalties under Sections 76 and 78 were set aside. Service tax demand was limited to normal period. Matter remanded to original authority for redetermining service tax amount with interest for normal period. Appeal allowed by way of remand. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 07 Jul 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=774493