https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788218 Concurrent factual findings supported the service tax demand for short payment on telephone services, and the court accepted that non-production of complete records justified invocation of the extended period of limitation. The limitation objection therefore failed. The court further found that the controversy turned on facts and did not raise any substantial question of law, so no appellate interference was warranted. The departmental demand was sustained. en-us Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 19 Mar 2026 08:59:39 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788218 Concurrent factual findings supported the service tax demand for short payment on telephone services, and the court accepted that non-production of complete records justified invocation of the extended period of limitation. The limitation objection therefore failed. The court further found that the controversy turned on facts and did not raise any substantial question of law, so no appellate interference was warranted. The departmental demand was sustained. Case-Laws Central Excise Tue, 10 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=788218