https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340226 The court set aside the order rejecting the appeal as barred by limitation, emphasizing the need for a fresh consideration of the matter. It highlighted that the Department must prove suppression of facts or contravention of provisions to extend the limitation period. The court found that the show cause notice and the impugned order lacked sufficient material to justify invoking the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to contest the matter on merits, ensuring a fair process. The original authority was directed to reconsider the show cause notice after allowing the petitioner to submit objections. en-us Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 01 Jan 2018 14:43:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340226 The court set aside the order rejecting the appeal as barred by limitation, emphasizing the need for a fresh consideration of the matter. It highlighted that the Department must prove suppression of facts or contravention of provisions to extend the limitation period. The court found that the show cause notice and the impugned order lacked sufficient material to justify invoking the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Act. The petitioner was granted the opportunity to contest the matter on merits, ensuring a fair process. The original authority was directed to reconsider the show cause notice after allowing the petitioner to submit objections. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=340226