<?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 (4) TMI 151 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789082</link>
    <description>Extended limitation under service tax law applies only where the Revenue proves fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts or other deliberate evasion; absent such material, the normal limitation period governs and the demand is time-barred. On the facts, no positive act of suppression or intent to evade was shown, and the notice was issued beyond even the extended period calculated from the relevant date for an unregistered assessee who filed no return. As the demand failed on limitation, the proposed classification as real estate agent service was not examined further, and the consequential interest and penalty could not stand because the foundational demand itself was unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 13 Apr 2026 14:11:00 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=894822" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (4) TMI 151 - CESTAT CHENNAI</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789082</link>
      <description>Extended limitation under service tax law applies only where the Revenue proves fraud, collusion, wilful misstatement, suppression of facts or other deliberate evasion; absent such material, the normal limitation period governs and the demand is time-barred. On the facts, no positive act of suppression or intent to evade was shown, and the notice was issued beyond even the extended period calculated from the relevant date for an unregistered assessee who filed no return. As the demand failed on limitation, the proposed classification as real estate agent service was not examined further, and the consequential interest and penalty could not stand because the foundational demand itself was unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 02 Apr 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789082</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>