https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782681 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand and penalties. It held that the appellant, already discharging service tax, could not be additionally fastened with liability under reverse charge for payments made via American Express Card, as the foreign service provider had an office in India and the department had not validly established liability under s.66A. The Tribunal further held that substantial exemption under Notification No. 18/2009-ST could not be denied merely for delayed filing of EXP-2 returns, treating such delay as a procedural lapse. Extended period of limitation was held inapplicable, and the entire show cause notice was consequently time-barred. en-us Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2025 08:57:07 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782681 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned demand and penalties. It held that the appellant, already discharging service tax, could not be additionally fastened with liability under reverse charge for payments made via American Express Card, as the foreign service provider had an office in India and the department had not validly established liability under s.66A. The Tribunal further held that substantial exemption under Notification No. 18/2009-ST could not be denied merely for delayed filing of EXP-2 returns, treating such delay as a procedural lapse. Extended period of limitation was held inapplicable, and the entire show cause notice was consequently time-barred. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 02 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782681