Extended limitation in service tax fails where suppression and intent to evade are not established.

Service tax demand could not be sustained by invoking the extended period because suppression of facts with intent to evade tax was not established. The assessee, a Government of India undertaking, had disclosed the activity, and the department had knowledge through audits and repeated correspondence during the relevant period. The original authority's finding that no mala fide intention to evade tax could be inferred had attained finality, leaving no basis for extended limitation. The demand was therefore barred by limitation, and the appeal succeeded without examination of the merits.

---

---

Issues: Whether the service tax demand could be sustained by invoking the extended period of limitation on the basis of alleged suppression of facts and intent to evade tax.

Analysis: The appellant was a Government of India undertaking, and the record showed that the department had knowledge of the activity through audits and repeated correspondence during the relevant period. The finding of the original authority that no mala fide intention to evade tax could be inferred was not challenged by the department and had attained finality. In these circumstances, suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of tax was not established, and the invocation of the extended period was not justified.

Conclusion: The demand was barred by limitation and the appeal succeeded on that ground, without examination of the merits.

---