https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205696 The department's appeal was partly allowed, confirming the duty demand and interest for the extended period. Penalties under Section 78 were upheld due to wilful misstatements in ST3 Returns. The tribunal emphasized determining taxable value per Section 67 of the Finance Act 1994 and validated service tax demand pre-19.04.06. The extended period of limitation was applicable for non-disclosure of taxable value. Penalties under Section 80 were waived for the public sector bank, with a caution against future violations. en-us Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Sun, 18 Sep 2011 19:03:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205696 The department's appeal was partly allowed, confirming the duty demand and interest for the extended period. Penalties under Section 78 were upheld due to wilful misstatements in ST3 Returns. The tribunal emphasized determining taxable value per Section 67 of the Finance Act 1994 and validated service tax demand pre-19.04.06. The extended period of limitation was applicable for non-disclosure of taxable value. Penalties under Section 80 were waived for the public sector bank, with a caution against future violations. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 04 Mar 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=205696