https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449415 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal against service tax demand based on Form 26AS from Income Tax Department. The Tribunal held that demand cannot be sustained solely on Form 26AS basis, citing precedent in M/S. Piyush Sharma case. Additionally, the extended limitation period was improperly invoked as the Department failed to issue show-cause notice timely despite starting investigation in April 2015, and conducted faulty investigation without determining payment purposes. The demand was dismissed on both substantive and limitation grounds. en-us Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 12 Feb 2024 06:29:18 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449415 CESTAT Kolkata allowed the appeal against service tax demand based on Form 26AS from Income Tax Department. The Tribunal held that demand cannot be sustained solely on Form 26AS basis, citing precedent in M/S. Piyush Sharma case. Additionally, the extended limitation period was improperly invoked as the Department failed to issue show-cause notice timely despite starting investigation in April 2015, and conducted faulty investigation without determining payment purposes. The demand was dismissed on both substantive and limitation grounds. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 08 Feb 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=449415