https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787264 Whether the extended limitation under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 applies to service tax on renting of immovable property amid a retrospective amendment and conflicting judicial views was considered; the governing principle applied is that the extended period requires suppression, willful misstatement, fraud or similar conduct. The Tribunal found the department acted on books of account and that genuine uncertainty created by the retrospective amendment and divergent judicial pronouncements meant there was no suppression or fraud, therefore the extended period could not be invoked and demands confirmed beyond the normal period were set aside for the assessee. en-us Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 02 Mar 2026 08:34:55 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787264 Whether the extended limitation under Section 73(1) of the Finance Act, 1994 applies to service tax on renting of immovable property amid a retrospective amendment and conflicting judicial views was considered; the governing principle applied is that the extended period requires suppression, willful misstatement, fraud or similar conduct. The Tribunal found the department acted on books of account and that genuine uncertainty created by the retrospective amendment and divergent judicial pronouncements meant there was no suppression or fraud, therefore the extended period could not be invoked and demands confirmed beyond the normal period were set aside for the assessee. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 29 Jan 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=787264