https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764249 The court set aside the impugned orders, allowing the appeals with consequential reliefs. It ruled that the service tax demand based solely on discrepancies between ST-3 Returns and Income Tax Returns was unsustainable, as the Revenue failed to provide corroborating evidence of service provision or receipt of consideration. Additionally, the show cause notice was deemed barred by the limitation period, as there was no evidence of intent to evade tax. The appellant's documentary evidence, including Chartered Accountant Certificates and Bank Statements, was considered sufficient to refute the demand, shifting the burden of proof to the Revenue. en-us Mon, 06 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Jan 2025 07:56:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764249 The court set aside the impugned orders, allowing the appeals with consequential reliefs. It ruled that the service tax demand based solely on discrepancies between ST-3 Returns and Income Tax Returns was unsustainable, as the Revenue failed to provide corroborating evidence of service provision or receipt of consideration. Additionally, the show cause notice was deemed barred by the limitation period, as there was no evidence of intent to evade tax. The appellant's documentary evidence, including Chartered Accountant Certificates and Bank Statements, was considered sufficient to refute the demand, shifting the burden of proof to the Revenue. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 06 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=764249