https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776879 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that invocation of the extended period of limitation was not sustainable. The appellant had been paying service tax on 33% under an earlier abatement and inadvertently continued to do so after the abatement was rescinded and liability shifted to 40% from 01.07.2012; returns were regularly filed and the short payment was detected only during an audit in 2014, with a show cause notice issued in 2017. A departmental reliance on a prior Tribunal decision was distinguished as factually different. en-us Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 21 Aug 2025 08:35:51 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776879 CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order, holding that invocation of the extended period of limitation was not sustainable. The appellant had been paying service tax on 33% under an earlier abatement and inadvertently continued to do so after the abatement was rescinded and liability shifted to 40% from 01.07.2012; returns were regularly filed and the short payment was detected only during an audit in 2014, with a show cause notice issued in 2017. A departmental reliance on a prior Tribunal decision was distinguished as factually different. Case-Laws Service Tax Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=776879