https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794351 Higher receipts shown in the income tax return were treated as taxable turnover where the appellant could not reconcile them with the ST-3 return or establish that any part fell outside the service tax net. The contracts were treated as works contracts requiring valuation under Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, and sub-contracting did not by itself remove independent tax liability; tax paid by the main contractor did not extinguish the appellant's own liability, subject to credit in law. Omission to disclose full receipts was treated as suppression with intent to evade tax, justifying extended limitation, interest, and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. en-us Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 Sat, 04 Jul 2026 08:15:49 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794351 Higher receipts shown in the income tax return were treated as taxable turnover where the appellant could not reconcile them with the ST-3 return or establish that any part fell outside the service tax net. The contracts were treated as works contracts requiring valuation under Rule 2A of the Service Tax (Determination of Value) Rules, 2006, and sub-contracting did not by itself remove independent tax liability; tax paid by the main contractor did not extinguish the appellant's own liability, subject to credit in law. Omission to disclose full receipts was treated as suppression with intent to evade tax, justifying extended limitation, interest, and penalties under the Finance Act, 1994. Case-Laws Service Tax Thu, 02 Jul 2026 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=794351