https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376428 A demand for service tax on a recipient of goods transport service could not be sustained by invoking the extended period of limitation where the alleged suppression rested only on non-payment of tax and non-filing of returns during a period when no statutory liability to pay existed. The second show cause notice also covered the same period as an earlier notice, which weakened the basis for alleging suppression. Retrospective amendments and validation provisions did not cure the absence of the ingredients required to extend limitation on these facts. The demand was therefore barred by limitation and could not be sustained. en-us Thu, 07 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 26 Aug 2019 15:53:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376428 A demand for service tax on a recipient of goods transport service could not be sustained by invoking the extended period of limitation where the alleged suppression rested only on non-payment of tax and non-filing of returns during a period when no statutory liability to pay existed. The second show cause notice also covered the same period as an earlier notice, which weakened the basis for alleging suppression. Retrospective amendments and validation provisions did not cure the absence of the ingredients required to extend limitation on these facts. The demand was therefore barred by limitation and could not be sustained. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 07 Mar 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=376428