Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Highlights
of of All Highlights
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Petitioner engaged in drilling bore wells for agriculturists claimed exemption under negative list entry of Finance Act, 1994. Court held that to invoke extended period of limitation under proviso to Section 73(1), mandatory requirements contemplated in Act were stated in show cause notice regarding petitioner's liability to pay service tax and penalties. Petitioner was given opportunity to reply and personal hearing. Once show cause notice invoking extended period is issued and inquiry conducted, grounds urged must be challenged through appeal under Act, not by challenging revenue's jurisdiction to issue notice. Availability of alternative efficacious remedy of appeal u/s 85 precludes entertaining writ petition under Article 226. No cogent reasons shown for revenue not providing sufficient cause to invoke extended period. Petition dismissed.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
