https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782235 CESTAT Bangalore partly allowed the service provider's appeal. It held that services prior to 01.06.2007 were classifiable as works contract following SC precedent, so service tax demand for that period was unsustainable. It further held that the value of free supplies could not be included for abatement under N/N. 1/2006, setting aside differential tax on that ground. Service tax on mobilization advances was held payable only for advances received on or after 01.06.2007, with interest. Liability on GTA services under RCM was upheld, but as tax was paid before the show cause notice, all penalties were set aside. en-us Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 27 Nov 2025 08:36:24 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782235 CESTAT Bangalore partly allowed the service provider's appeal. It held that services prior to 01.06.2007 were classifiable as works contract following SC precedent, so service tax demand for that period was unsustainable. It further held that the value of free supplies could not be included for abatement under N/N. 1/2006, setting aside differential tax on that ground. Service tax on mobilization advances was held payable only for advances received on or after 01.06.2007, with interest. Liability on GTA services under RCM was upheld, but as tax was paid before the show cause notice, all penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 25 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782235