https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782981 CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that the dispute on taxability under Notification 25/2012-ST was purely interpretational; therefore, the extended period under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 was not invocable. Consequently, demands relating to receipts from a power distribution entity and an agricultural market committee were held time-barred and quashed. As to short payment of admitted service tax for 2015-16, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to reconcile challans for payments made in 2017-18 with ST-3 returns. Any unreconciled short payment is recoverable with interest, with penalty under Section 78 sustained only to that extent, while penalties under Section 77(1)(b) and 77(1)(c) were set aside. en-us Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 08 Dec 2025 08:31:20 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782981 CESTAT allowed the appeal in part. It held that the dispute on taxability under Notification 25/2012-ST was purely interpretational; therefore, the extended period under the proviso to Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 was not invocable. Consequently, demands relating to receipts from a power distribution entity and an agricultural market committee were held time-barred and quashed. As to short payment of admitted service tax for 2015-16, the matter was remanded to the adjudicating authority to reconcile challans for payments made in 2017-18 with ST-3 returns. Any unreconciled short payment is recoverable with interest, with penalty under Section 78 sustained only to that extent, while penalties under Section 77(1)(b) and 77(1)(c) were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 05 Dec 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=782981