https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209984 Wilful suppression for service tax requires deliberate nondisclosure with intent to evade tax; a mere omission to declare a levy is insufficient to justify the extended limitation period. The Tribunal also noted that departmental clarification treats conclusion of proceedings under sections 73(1A) and 73(3) as concluding the proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994. On these principles, invocation of suppression and the extended period was not sustained, and the assessee obtained relief against the confirmed demand. en-us Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 05 Jul 2013 18:25:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209984 Wilful suppression for service tax requires deliberate nondisclosure with intent to evade tax; a mere omission to declare a levy is insufficient to justify the extended limitation period. The Tribunal also noted that departmental clarification treats conclusion of proceedings under sections 73(1A) and 73(3) as concluding the proceedings under the Finance Act, 1994. On these principles, invocation of suppression and the extended period was not sustained, and the assessee obtained relief against the confirmed demand. Case-Laws Central Excise Fri, 01 Jul 2011 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209984