Suppression of taxable value in ST-3 returns justified extended limitation and sustained tax, interest, and penalties.

Suppression of taxable value in ST-3 returns justified invocation of the extended period of limitation where the assessee failed to furnish the information sought by the department and offered no explanation for the difference between the declared value and the income reflected in income tax data and Form 26AS. The undisclosed taxable value was detected only through departmental enquiry, supporting a finding of suppression with intent to evade service tax. In a self-assessment regime, the assessee bore responsibility for correct disclosure and payment. Once suppression was established, the demand of service tax, interest, and penalty under the penal provision was upheld.

---

---

Issues: Whether the extended period of limitation was rightly invoked on the basis of suppression of taxable value in the ST-3 returns, and whether the demand of service tax with interest and penalties was sustainable.

Analysis: The appellant did not furnish the information sought by the department and the taxable value disclosed in the ST-3 returns was found to be substantially lower than the income reflected in the income tax data and Form 26AS. On that comparison, the undisclosed taxable value was detected only through departmental enquiry. The absence of any explanation for the differential value, coupled with non-disclosure in the statutory returns, supported the finding of suppression of facts with intent to evade payment of service tax. In the self-assessment regime, correct disclosure and payment rested on the assessee, and the failure to declare the correct value justified invocation of the extended period. Once suppression was established, the demand of tax, interest, and the penalty under the penal provision also followed.

Conclusion: The extended period of limitation was validly invoked and the demand of service tax, interest, and penalties was upheld against the assessee.

---