Event Management services - appellant entered into an agreement with Unicef for providing services appellant contended that services provided to Unicef are exempted in terms of notification no.16/2002-ST Revenue contended that the benefit of the said notification cannot be extended to the appellant on the ground that the services does not stand provided by them directly but they have provided the services to some other party, who had further provided the said services to Unicef Held that - Service was provided to Unicef has led to a bona fide belief on the part of the assessee to entertain a view that no further service tax is required to be paid by them. Limitation period limitation invoked by the department rejected by the court services on the Even Management Services being provided by them and ST-3 returns were being filed - lower authorities have not produced any evidence on record to show that the appellant was not including the value of the disputed services in their ST-3 Returns with any malafide intent stay application allowed in the favour of the appellant. .............................. Service Tax - Case Law
↧