2026-VIL-486-CESTAT-DEL-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Invocation of extended period of limitation - The appellant, a state instrumentality, had availed CENVAT credit of service tax paid on construction services received prior to July 2012, during which period the appellant was not registered as a service provider - Department invoked the extended period of limitation to demand the wrongfully availed CENVAT credit - Whether the extended period of limitation under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 was correctly invoked by the department - HELD - The extended period of limitation cannot be invoked in the absence of any positive act of fraud, collusion, suppression of facts or willful misstatement by the appellant with an intent to evade payment of tax. The mere fact that the issue was detected during an audit and that the appellant was operating under self-assessment is not sufficient to invoke the extended period. The intentional and willful suppression of facts cannot be presumed merely because the appellant was operating under self-assessment or because the department discovered the alleged inadmissible CENVAT credit only during the audit. The appellant had discharged its obligation by filing the ST-3 returns, and the burden was on the department to scrutinize the returns and make a best judgment assessment under Section 72. In the absence of any positive allegation of fraud or suppression against the appellant, the extended period of limitation was not correctly invoked - The impugned order is set aside on the ground of limitation – The appeal is allowed

Quick Search

/

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page