https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781555 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside recovery of service tax, interest and penalty where the demand was founded solely on discrepancies between Income-Tax/26AS records and ST-3 returns. The Tribunal held that the Department must investigate causes of discrepancies and establish that receipts constitute consideration for a service under s.65B(44)/s.67 before invoking extended limitation or alleging evasion. Absent any fact-finding linking specific receipts to taxable services or prima facie evidence of deliberate evasion, the show-cause notice and extended-period demand were unsustainable. en-us Thu, 13 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 18 Nov 2025 08:42:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781555 CESTAT allowed the appeal, setting aside recovery of service tax, interest and penalty where the demand was founded solely on discrepancies between Income-Tax/26AS records and ST-3 returns. The Tribunal held that the Department must investigate causes of discrepancies and establish that receipts constitute consideration for a service under s.65B(44)/s.67 before invoking extended limitation or alleging evasion. Absent any fact-finding linking specific receipts to taxable services or prima facie evidence of deliberate evasion, the show-cause notice and extended-period demand were unsustainable. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 13 Nov 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=781555