https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253781 Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 requires a reasoned limitation analysis before a service tax demand can be treated as in time. The normal period is one year, while the extended five-year period applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade tax is established on the facts. A conclusory finding that the demand was within time, without examining the demand notice date or the factual basis for extension, is unsustainable. The matter was remitted to the Tribunal to reconsider limitation with reference to the relevant dates and surrounding facts. en-us Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 Wed, 03 Dec 2014 17:56:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253781 Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 requires a reasoned limitation analysis before a service tax demand can be treated as in time. The normal period is one year, while the extended five-year period applies only where fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts, or intent to evade tax is established on the facts. A conclusory finding that the demand was within time, without examining the demand notice date or the factual basis for extension, is unsustainable. The matter was remitted to the Tribunal to reconsider limitation with reference to the relevant dates and surrounding facts. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 05 Nov 2013 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=253781