https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386419 The Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was not invocable because there was no suppression or misconduct by the assessee. The assessee had disclosed the foreign franchise service arrangement, had earlier sought clarification from the Department, and the relevant facts were already within departmental knowledge. As the notice was unsustainable on limitation, the consequential demand of interest and the penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were also set aside. The matter turned on disclosure of facts and the absence of any basis for invoking the extended limitation period. en-us Fri, 10 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Sep 2019 17:28:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386419 The Tribunal held that the extended period of limitation was not invocable because there was no suppression or misconduct by the assessee. The assessee had disclosed the foreign franchise service arrangement, had earlier sought clarification from the Department, and the relevant facts were already within departmental knowledge. As the notice was unsustainable on limitation, the consequential demand of interest and the penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were also set aside. The matter turned on disclosure of facts and the absence of any basis for invoking the extended limitation period. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 10 May 2019 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=386419