https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789449 A service tax demand based only on ITR and Form 26AS discrepancies, without independent verification or corroborative evidence of taxable service, was treated as unsustainable. Mere comparison of income-tax data with ST-3 returns was held insufficient to establish liability under service tax law unless the department proves that a taxable service was actually rendered. In the absence of evidence of suppression of facts or wilful misstatement, the extended period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 could not be invoked. The demand, together with consequential interest and penalty, was therefore barred by limitation. en-us Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Thu, 09 Apr 2026 08:09:04 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789449 A service tax demand based only on ITR and Form 26AS discrepancies, without independent verification or corroborative evidence of taxable service, was treated as unsustainable. Mere comparison of income-tax data with ST-3 returns was held insufficient to establish liability under service tax law unless the department proves that a taxable service was actually rendered. In the absence of evidence of suppression of facts or wilful misstatement, the extended period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 could not be invoked. The demand, together with consequential interest and penalty, was therefore barred by limitation. Case-Laws Service Tax Fri, 27 Mar 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=789449