<?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>2026 (2) TMI 1279 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787131</link>
    <description>Export of services under Rule 6A and SEZ supplies were treated as exempt where the required documentation and exemption conditions were satisfied, but the balance of taxable domestic service income remained liable to service tax. The assessee&#039;s claim for Cenvat credit failed for lack of supporting duty-paying documents and compliance records. Non-filing of ST-3 returns, coupled with collection of service tax from recipients without remittance or disclosure of liability, was held to constitute suppression of material facts with intent to evade tax. On that basis, invocation of the extended limitation period and the consequential penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were upheld.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 27 Feb 2026 08:36:12 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=888198" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (2) TMI 1279 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787131</link>
      <description>Export of services under Rule 6A and SEZ supplies were treated as exempt where the required documentation and exemption conditions were satisfied, but the balance of taxable domestic service income remained liable to service tax. The assessee&#039;s claim for Cenvat credit failed for lack of supporting duty-paying documents and compliance records. Non-filing of ST-3 returns, coupled with collection of service tax from recipients without remittance or disclosure of liability, was held to constitute suppression of material facts with intent to evade tax. On that basis, invocation of the extended limitation period and the consequential penalties under the Finance Act, 1994 were upheld.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Wed, 25 Feb 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787131</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>