https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368677 The Tribunal partially allowed the appellant-assessee's appeal, dismissing the Department's appeal. The appellant-assessee failed to disclose all taxable services provided in their ST-3 returns, specifically suppressing the correct value received from Mandap Keeper Service. The demand for service tax under Mandap Keeper Service was upheld, while the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act was set aside due to a reasonable cause. The extended period of limitation for tax demand was deemed invalid as no objections were raised during the audit, indicating no intentional suppression by the appellant-assessee. en-us Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 27 Aug 2019 11:48:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368677 The Tribunal partially allowed the appellant-assessee's appeal, dismissing the Department's appeal. The appellant-assessee failed to disclose all taxable services provided in their ST-3 returns, specifically suppressing the correct value received from Mandap Keeper Service. The demand for service tax under Mandap Keeper Service was upheld, while the penalty under Section 76 of the Finance Act was set aside due to a reasonable cause. The extended period of limitation for tax demand was deemed invalid as no objections were raised during the audit, indicating no intentional suppression by the appellant-assessee. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 22 Feb 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=368677