https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762706 The CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal challenging service tax demand for rent-a-cab services. The tribunal held that the extended five-year limitation period under section 73(1) proviso of the Finance Act could not be invoked without establishing suppression of facts, fraud, or willful misstatement. Since the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal one-year limitation period without invoking the proviso, and the department had prior knowledge through earlier notices and public documents like profit and loss accounts, no suppression could be established. The demand was time-barred. en-us Wed, 04 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 06 Dec 2024 08:47:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762706 The CESTAT NEW DELHI allowed the appeal challenging service tax demand for rent-a-cab services. The tribunal held that the extended five-year limitation period under section 73(1) proviso of the Finance Act could not be invoked without establishing suppression of facts, fraud, or willful misstatement. Since the show cause notice was issued beyond the normal one-year limitation period without invoking the proviso, and the department had prior knowledge through earlier notices and public documents like profit and loss accounts, no suppression could be established. The demand was time-barred. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 04 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=762706