Certainty lies at the heart of taxation law as individuals must be aware of what might be taxable and thus be given the liberty to plan their finances accordingly. It is in this light that the principles of classification in service tax law assume importance as they provide guidance regarding what head a service may be taxable under. So, how are these principles that can now be found in the text of the Finance Act to be interpreted? What happens when principles of classification are incorrectly construed? This paper attempts to answer these questions, studying the decision of the Chennai CESTAT in Future Focus Infotech v. Commissioner of Service Tax. The paper argues that the decision of the CESTAT is incorrect and can have undesirable repercussions as precedent.