https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780466 CESTAT ALLAHABAD allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand and penalties based on invocation of the extended period of limitation. The tribunal found the appellant had a bona fide belief-supported by explanations-for treating part of ITR receipts as not taxable and had filed ST-3 returns and assessed tax accordingly. Relying on SC precedent that the Revenue bears the burden to prove mala fide conduct, the tribunal held no willful suppression or misdeclaration was shown and therefore the extended limitation and penalties could not be invoked. en-us Tue, 07 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 31 Oct 2025 08:23:11 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780466 CESTAT ALLAHABAD allowed the appeal, setting aside the demand and penalties based on invocation of the extended period of limitation. The tribunal found the appellant had a bona fide belief-supported by explanations-for treating part of ITR receipts as not taxable and had filed ST-3 returns and assessed tax accordingly. Relying on SC precedent that the Revenue bears the burden to prove mala fide conduct, the tribunal held no willful suppression or misdeclaration was shown and therefore the extended limitation and penalties could not be invoked. Case-Laws Service Tax Tue, 07 Oct 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=780466