https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751724 CESTAT New Delhi upheld service tax demand for 2007-08 and 2008-09 periods, finding appellant suppressed facts by maintaining two different balance sheets with varying income figures. The tribunal confirmed extended limitation period was validly invoked due to deliberate suppression with intent to escape tax payment. However, demands under five other show cause notices were set aside as activities involved sale of pre-recorded CDs/DVDs rather than services. The quantification matter was remanded to adjudicating authority for recalculation. Appeal was partially allowed through remand. en-us Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 23 Apr 2024 10:50:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751724 CESTAT New Delhi upheld service tax demand for 2007-08 and 2008-09 periods, finding appellant suppressed facts by maintaining two different balance sheets with varying income figures. The tribunal confirmed extended limitation period was validly invoked due to deliberate suppression with intent to escape tax payment. However, demands under five other show cause notices were set aside as activities involved sale of pre-recorded CDs/DVDs rather than services. The quantification matter was remanded to adjudicating authority for recalculation. Appeal was partially allowed through remand. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 19 Apr 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=751724