<?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>2018 (2) TMI 330 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354909</link>
    <description>Extended limitation could not be invoked for a service tax demand under reverse charge on services received from outside India because the assessee had already disclosed its stand to the department, and the dispute arose from material available in audit and regular books of account. On those facts, the department was held to have prior knowledge of the issue before issuance of the show cause notice, so the notice was time-barred and not maintainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Feb 2018 08:20:19 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=507868" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (2) TMI 330 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354909</link>
      <description>Extended limitation could not be invoked for a service tax demand under reverse charge on services received from outside India because the assessee had already disclosed its stand to the department, and the dispute arose from material available in audit and regular books of account. On those facts, the department was held to have prior knowledge of the issue before issuance of the show cause notice, so the notice was time-barred and not maintainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 23 Jan 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=354909</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>