https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765376 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that service tax demand for April 2011 to September 2011 was time-barred as it exceeded the five-year extended limitation period. For October 2011 to March 2012, the extended limitation period could not be invoked as suppression of facts must be willful with intent to evade service tax payment, following Supreme Court precedent in Pushpam Pharmaceuticals. The tribunal found no willful suppression with intent to evade tax, making the demand invalid. Appeal allowed. en-us Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Jan 2025 07:54:28 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765376 CESTAT NEW DELHI held that service tax demand for April 2011 to September 2011 was time-barred as it exceeded the five-year extended limitation period. For October 2011 to March 2012, the extended limitation period could not be invoked as suppression of facts must be willful with intent to evade service tax payment, following Supreme Court precedent in Pushpam Pharmaceuticals. The tribunal found no willful suppression with intent to evade tax, making the demand invalid. Appeal allowed. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 21 Jan 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=765376