https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441428 A service tax demand under Business Auxiliary Service was held unsustainable because the show-cause notice did not identify the specific sub-clause of the definition relied upon, depriving the assessee of clear notice of the alleged taxable activity. The Tribunal also held that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked on the facts, as non-registration, non-filing of ST-3 returns, and non-payment of tax, without more, did not establish suppression of facts with intent to evade tax. The demand therefore failed on both specificity and limitation, resulting in relief to the assessee. en-us Mon, 07 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 12 Jun 2026 14:23:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441428 A service tax demand under Business Auxiliary Service was held unsustainable because the show-cause notice did not identify the specific sub-clause of the definition relied upon, depriving the assessee of clear notice of the alleged taxable activity. The Tribunal also held that the extended period of limitation could not be invoked on the facts, as non-registration, non-filing of ST-3 returns, and non-payment of tax, without more, did not establish suppression of facts with intent to evade tax. The demand therefore failed on both specificity and limitation, resulting in relief to the assessee. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 07 Aug 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=441428