https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440497 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on the differential value based on data shared by CBDT. The tribunal held that the department failed to provide evidence linking the income declared to taxable services and that service tax cannot be demanded solely based on CBDT data. Additionally, the tribunal found that the extended period for demand was unjustified, as there was no intent to evade tax. The demand based on income tax data was deemed unsustainable, and confirming demands for unquantified periods was considered void and illegal. The tribunal set aside the service tax demand, interest, and penalty, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. en-us Wed, 19 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 20 Jul 2023 08:28:42 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440497 The tribunal ruled in favor of the appellant, finding that the appellant was not liable to pay service tax on the differential value based on data shared by CBDT. The tribunal held that the department failed to provide evidence linking the income declared to taxable services and that service tax cannot be demanded solely based on CBDT data. Additionally, the tribunal found that the extended period for demand was unjustified, as there was no intent to evade tax. The demand based on income tax data was deemed unsustainable, and confirming demands for unquantified periods was considered void and illegal. The tribunal set aside the service tax demand, interest, and penalty, allowing the appeal with consequential relief. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 19 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=440497