Inventory write-off and fraudulent/wrongful trading allegations in corporate insolvency led to director liability principles applied and appeal dismis...
Condonation of delay in filing GSTR-3B returns and entitlement to Section 62 benefit results in withdrawal of assessments and revocation of attachment...
Service tax demand confirmed solely on the basis of CBDT/Form 26AS and income tax return data was held unsustainable because the Revenue made no independent verification, enquiry, or corroborative proof of taxable services. Mere comparison of returns could not by itself establish liability under the Finance Act, 1994. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable because suppression with intent to evade was not proved on the facts, and departmental correspondence did not amount to such suppression. As the demand failed on evidence and limitation, the consequential interest and penalty were also set aside.
Service tax demand confirmed solely on the basis of CBDT/Form 26AS and income tax return data was held unsustainable because the Revenue made no independent verification, enquiry, or corroborative proof of taxable services. Mere comparison of returns could not by itself establish liability under the Finance Act, 1994. The extended period of limitation was also held inapplicable because suppression with intent to evade was not proved on the facts, and departmental correspondence did not amount to such suppression. As the demand failed on evidence and limitation, the consequential interest and penalty were also set aside.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4816 
Join Channel 
