https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345574 The appellate tribunal upheld the Revenue authorities' invocation of an extended period for the demand of service tax liability from July 2001 to March 2005, despite the appellant's disclosure of activity before the show-cause notice issuance. The tribunal emphasized that the absence of filed returns hindered the authorities from confirming the correct discharge of tax liability, justifying the extended period. Additionally, the tribunal rejected the argument of overlapping demand between the previous adjudication and the subsequent show-cause notice, reinstating the Order-in-Original and setting aside the impugned order. en-us Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 08 Aug 2017 11:55:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345574 The appellate tribunal upheld the Revenue authorities' invocation of an extended period for the demand of service tax liability from July 2001 to March 2005, despite the appellant's disclosure of activity before the show-cause notice issuance. The tribunal emphasized that the absence of filed returns hindered the authorities from confirming the correct discharge of tax liability, justifying the extended period. Additionally, the tribunal rejected the argument of overlapping demand between the previous adjudication and the subsequent show-cause notice, reinstating the Order-in-Original and setting aside the impugned order. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 20 Jun 2017 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=345574