<?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>2023 (8) TMI 256 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441277</link>
    <description>HC dismissed the petition, upholding Order-in-Original No.2/23(ST) dated 31.01.2023 and the SCN dated 26.04.2021 that invoked the extended limitation under Section 73, Finance Act, 1994. The court held limitation is a mixed question of fact and law and found the petitioner had failed to file returns as required by Rule 7, Service Tax Rules, 1994, constituting suppression of facts; accordingly the proviso to Section 73 was rightly invoked and no interference was warranted.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Thu, 13 Nov 2025 10:09:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=721691" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2023 (8) TMI 256 - MADRAS HIGH COURT</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441277</link>
      <description>HC dismissed the petition, upholding Order-in-Original No.2/23(ST) dated 31.01.2023 and the SCN dated 26.04.2021 that invoked the extended limitation under Section 73, Finance Act, 1994. The court held limitation is a mixed question of fact and law and found the petitioner had failed to file returns as required by Rule 7, Service Tax Rules, 1994, constituting suppression of facts; accordingly the proviso to Section 73 was rightly invoked and no interference was warranted.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Fri, 14 Jul 2023 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441277</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>