<?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 (9) TMI 1382 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799356</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for service tax demand was not invokable where the ST-3 return was filed on time and service tax payment was undisputed. An inadvertent reference to the registration number of another unit was treated as an error insufficient to justify the extended limitation period. The proceedings were quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Mon, 21 Sep 2026 08:57:08 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=924421" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (9) TMI 1382 - CESTAT KOLKATA</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799356</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for service tax demand was not invokable where the ST-3 return was filed on time and service tax payment was undisputed. An inadvertent reference to the registration number of another unit was treated as an error insufficient to justify the extended limitation period. The proceedings were quashed in favour of the assessee.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Sep 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=799356</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>