https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393340 Extended limitation could not be used to confirm service tax demand on galvanization job-work, because the assessee had disclosed in monthly returns the reversal of Cenvat credit on inputs used for that activity. That disclosure indicated bona fides and supported the assessee's understanding that the activity amounted to manufacture and, in any event, that the finished hand-pumps were exempt. In the absence of material showing mala fides or suppression, the longer limitation period was unavailable to the Revenue, and the demand failed on limitation. en-us Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 13 Mar 2020 11:07:40 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393340 Extended limitation could not be used to confirm service tax demand on galvanization job-work, because the assessee had disclosed in monthly returns the reversal of Cenvat credit on inputs used for that activity. That disclosure indicated bona fides and supported the assessee's understanding that the activity amounted to manufacture and, in any event, that the finished hand-pumps were exempt. In the absence of material showing mala fides or suppression, the longer limitation period was unavailable to the Revenue, and the demand failed on limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 06 Feb 2020 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=393340