<?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 (12) TMI 948 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372179</link>
    <description>Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 does not permit service tax recovery beyond five years from the relevant date, even where the extended period is invoked for suppression. As the demand covered a period extending beyond that maximum limitation and the show cause notices were issued on 30.05.2012, only the portion within five years could survive. The impugned orders were therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh quantification within the permissible period together with reconsideration of penalty.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 19 Dec 2018 07:46:57 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=547405" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2018 (12) TMI 948 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372179</link>
      <description>Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 does not permit service tax recovery beyond five years from the relevant date, even where the extended period is invoked for suppression. As the demand covered a period extending beyond that maximum limitation and the show cause notices were issued on 30.05.2012, only the portion within five years could survive. The impugned orders were therefore set aside, and the matter was remanded for fresh quantification within the permissible period together with reconsideration of penalty.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Tue, 11 Dec 2018 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=372179</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>