https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458286 CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax demand under extended limitation period was invalid where appellant had obtained registration for construction services, filed returns with adequate disclosures, and paid tax after claiming statutory abatement. The tribunal found no suppression of facts as the issue involved only interpretation of statutory provisions under consideration by various courts. Since constitutional validity was being challenged before HCs by builder associations, invoking extended period under Section 73(4) of Finance Act 1994 was unjustified. Demand with interest and penalty set aside; appeal allowed. en-us Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:52:44 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458286 CESTAT Allahabad held that service tax demand under extended limitation period was invalid where appellant had obtained registration for construction services, filed returns with adequate disclosures, and paid tax after claiming statutory abatement. The tribunal found no suppression of facts as the issue involved only interpretation of statutory provisions under consideration by various courts. Since constitutional validity was being challenged before HCs by builder associations, invoking extended period under Section 73(4) of Finance Act 1994 was unjustified. Demand with interest and penalty set aside; appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 27 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=458286