TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
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 The Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation of five years under proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act could not have been invoked in the present case. The Tribunal observed that for invoking the extended period, at least one of the five elements of fraud, collusion, wilful mis-statement, suppression of facts or contravention with intent to evade payment of service tax must be established. Mere difference of opinion between the department and the assessee regarding leviability of duty does not amount to wilful suppression of facts. In the present case, the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal period of one year, without invoking the proviso. The facts were already in the knowledge of the department through public documents and earlier show cause notices. The issue involved interpretation of law and there was no suppression of facts with intent to evade service tax.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
