Political contribution deductions require genuine transactions; banking records and party registration alone cannot defeat evidence of accommodation e...
Post-death GST liability permits fresh proceedings against legal representatives, while discontinued-business recovery remains limited to the inherite...
Non-confirmation of FEMA seizure prevents adjudicators from overriding pending appellate findings on recorded reasons and suspected foreign asset hold...
CESTAT set aside service tax demand of Rs.5,54,77,142/- with interest against appellant, ruling the Show Cause Notice void ab initio as it was served on 30.12.2022 for period 2012-16, exceeding five-year limitation under Section 73(1) Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held demand based solely on Form 26AS and Income Tax returns without proper investigation was legally unsustainable, requiring corroborative evidence per established precedent. Extended limitation period invocation failed as appellant filed nil returns from October 2013-March 2014 without departmental objection, establishing no suppression with intent to evade tax. Section 78 penalty was set aside, but penalties under Sections 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 77(2) were upheld for failure to file subsequent periodic returns despite claimed exemption eligibility under N/N. 25/2012-S.T.
CESTAT set aside service tax demand of Rs.5,54,77,142/- with interest against appellant, ruling the Show Cause Notice void ab initio as it was served on 30.12.2022 for period 2012-16, exceeding five-year limitation under Section 73(1) Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal held demand based solely on Form 26AS and Income Tax returns without proper investigation was legally unsustainable, requiring corroborative evidence per established precedent. Extended limitation period invocation failed as appellant filed nil returns from October 2013-March 2014 without departmental objection, establishing no suppression with intent to evade tax. Section 78 penalty was set aside, but penalties under Sections 77(1)(c)(ii), 77(1)(c)(iii) and 77(2) were upheld for failure to file subsequent periodic returns despite claimed exemption eligibility under N/N. 25/2012-S.T.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
