2026-VIL-1149-CESTAT-ALH-ST

SERVICE TAX CESTAT Cases

Service Tax - Demand based on data obtained from Income Tax Department, Invocation of extended period of limitation - Whether the extended period of limitation prescribed under Section 73(2) of the Finance Act, 1994 is invocable when the assessee had entertained a bona fide belief regarding non-taxability of services and all transactions were transparently recorded in books of accounts without any evidence of suppression, misstatement or fraudulent intent to evade taxes – HELD - The principle established in precedent decisions recognizes that where activities are fully reflected in balance sheets and income tax returns which are public documents accessible to revenue authorities, and the demand is based on data obtained from income tax department records, no suppression of facts can be attributed to the assessee. The burden of prima facie proving fraud, willful misstatement or suppression of facts lies on the revenue, which has not been discharged herein. The appellant entertained a bona fide belief regarding non-taxability of the services, particularly given the scope and nature of activities undertaken which did not fall within the generally understood activities of a cable operator. The mere failure to provide certain information or declaration would not amount to suppression with intent to evade payment of taxes sufficient to justify invocation of extended period of limitation - The demand for the period from 2013-14 to 2015-16 is set aside as barred by limitation. The demand for the period from 01-04-2016 to 30-06-2017 is confirmed as falling within the normal period. All penalties imposed under Sections 78, 77(1)(a), 77(2) and 70 of the Finance Act, 1994 are set aside – The appeal is partly allowed

Create Account



Log In



Forgot Password


Please Note: This facility is only for Subscribing Members.

Email this page



Feedback this page