<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2014 (1) TMI 43 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241818</link>
    <description>A show cause notice under service tax law was held time barred because it did not invoke the extended limitation period and contained no allegation of suppression or wilful omission, so the extended period could not be applied. On merits, the receipts reflected in income tax returns were not fully treated as taxable security service value because the taxable value already disclosed in ST-3 returns substantially explained the receipts, and the residual amount was accepted as diesel and travel-related charges. The demand was therefore unsustainable both on limitation and on merits, and the dropping of the demand was upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 01 Jan 2014 12:54:15 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=341459" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2014 (1) TMI 43 - CESTAT NEW DELHI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241818</link>
      <description>A show cause notice under service tax law was held time barred because it did not invoke the extended limitation period and contained no allegation of suppression or wilful omission, so the extended period could not be applied. On merits, the receipts reflected in income tax returns were not fully treated as taxable security service value because the taxable value already disclosed in ST-3 returns substantially explained the receipts, and the residual amount was accepted as diesel and travel-related charges. The demand was therefore unsustainable both on limitation and on merits, and the dropping of the demand was upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Sep 2013 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=241818</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>