HC held that service tax liability cannot be inferred from Form 26AS alone; tax must rest on a statutory basis and a proper assessment under the Finance Act, 1994. Because the adjudicating authority relied on income-tax data without determining whether the receipts were taxable or exempt healthcare receipts, the demand was unsustainable. It also held that the extended limitation under the proviso to section 73(1) requires the statutory preconditions, including a clear finding of wilful intent to evade tax; mere non-filing of returns or non-production of documents was insufficient, so the notice and adjudication lacked jurisdiction. The writ was maintainable despite an alternative remedy, and the show cause notice, order-in-original, interest and penalties were quashed.
HC held that service tax liability cannot be inferred from Form 26AS alone; tax must rest on a statutory basis and a proper assessment under the Finance Act, 1994. Because the adjudicating authority relied on income-tax data without determining whether the receipts were taxable or exempt healthcare receipts, the demand was unsustainable. It also held that the extended limitation under the proviso to section 73(1) requires the statutory preconditions, including a clear finding of wilful intent to evade tax; mere non-filing of returns or non-production of documents was insufficient, so the notice and adjudication lacked jurisdiction. The writ was maintainable despite an alternative remedy, and the show cause notice, order-in-original, interest and penalties were quashed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
of 4801
Join Channel
TaxTMI 
