https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766012 CESTAT Kolkata held that service tax demands under extended limitation period were unsustainable as appellant was registered, filing returns regularly, and no suppression of facts was established. Appellant remained liable for service tax during normal limitation period with interest. Penalty under Section 78 was set aside, but penalties under Sections 77(1)(a) and 77(2) were upheld for failure to register under tour operator and business auxiliary service categories. Appeal disposed of with partial relief granted. en-us Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 15 Feb 2025 08:00:45 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766012 CESTAT Kolkata held that service tax demands under extended limitation period were unsustainable as appellant was registered, filing returns regularly, and no suppression of facts was established. Appellant remained liable for service tax during normal limitation period with interest. Penalty under Section 78 was set aside, but penalties under Sections 77(1)(a) and 77(2) were upheld for failure to register under tour operator and business auxiliary service categories. Appeal disposed of with partial relief granted. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 13 Feb 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=766012