<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_sitemap/rss_feed_blog.xsl?v=1750492856"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>2025 (10) TMI 1075 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780279</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for service tax could be invoked only on proof of deliberate suppression, wilful misstatement, or other positive conduct showing intent to evade tax; mere non-payment or non-disclosure was insufficient. As the demand for the later period rested on balance-sheet figures and documents already available to the assessee, and an earlier notice on the same issue had already been issued, the record did not establish the requisite mala fide intent. The demand beyond the normal period was therefore time-barred, and the related penalty could not survive once the foundation for extended limitation failed. The challenge to the remand and speaking-order direction also failed.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 28 Oct 2025 08:33:50 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=860547" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2025 (10) TMI 1075 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780279</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for service tax could be invoked only on proof of deliberate suppression, wilful misstatement, or other positive conduct showing intent to evade tax; mere non-payment or non-disclosure was insufficient. As the demand for the later period rested on balance-sheet figures and documents already available to the assessee, and an earlier notice on the same issue had already been issued, the record did not establish the requisite mala fide intent. The demand beyond the normal period was therefore time-barred, and the related penalty could not survive once the foundation for extended limitation failed. The challenge to the remand and speaking-order direction also failed.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 20 Aug 2025 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780279</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>