https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370576 The Tribunal accepted the Appellant's argument against a time-barred demand for service tax and interest, ruling that interest is not sustainable if the demand is time-barred. However, the Appellant's claim for cum-tax benefit was denied due to suppression of facts, leading to liability for penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal remanded the matter for recalculation of the demand and interest, directing a refund of any excess amount deposited by the Appellant. en-us Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 20 Nov 2018 07:46:35 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370576 The Tribunal accepted the Appellant's argument against a time-barred demand for service tax and interest, ruling that interest is not sustainable if the demand is time-barred. However, the Appellant's claim for cum-tax benefit was denied due to suppression of facts, leading to liability for penalty under Section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. The Tribunal remanded the matter for recalculation of the demand and interest, directing a refund of any excess amount deposited by the Appellant. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 01 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=370576