https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469524 Service tax demand was found unsustainable where the assessee had already discharged tax through challans and CENVAT credit, and the adjudicating order had ignored the debit entry made in the CENVAT account. On the limitation issue, the extended period could not be invoked because the assessee was a registered service provider, had filed returns for part of the relevant period, and had placed material showing tax payment for the remaining period, leaving the revenue aware of the transactions. Once the demand failed on merits and limitation, the consequential penalties also could not survive. The impugned demand and penalties were set aside. en-us Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 20 Jun 2026 10:01:48 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469524 Service tax demand was found unsustainable where the assessee had already discharged tax through challans and CENVAT credit, and the adjudicating order had ignored the debit entry made in the CENVAT account. On the limitation issue, the extended period could not be invoked because the assessee was a registered service provider, had filed returns for part of the relevant period, and had placed material showing tax payment for the remaining period, leaving the revenue aware of the transactions. Once the demand failed on merits and limitation, the consequential penalties also could not survive. The impugned demand and penalties were set aside. Case-Laws Service Tax Mon, 30 Jun 2025 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=469524