<?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 (10) TMI 389 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
    <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800446</link>
    <description>Extended limitation for a service tax demand cannot rest on alleged suppression where ST-3 returns and material facts were already available to the Department when it issued an earlier show-cause notice on the same or similar facts. Departmental knowledge of those facts prevents their later characterisation as suppression. The subsequent notice must therefore be restricted to the normal limitation period, making invocation of the extended period unsustainable.</description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
    <lastBuildDate>Wed, 07 Oct 2026 08:26:41 +0530</lastBuildDate>
    <generator>TaxTMI RSS Generator</generator>
    <atom:link href="https://www.taxtmi.com/rss_feed_blog?id=928339" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"/>
    <item>
      <title>2026 (10) TMI 389 - CESTAT ALLAHABAD</title>
      <link>https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800446</link>
      <description>Extended limitation for a service tax demand cannot rest on alleged suppression where ST-3 returns and material facts were already available to the Department when it issued an earlier show-cause notice on the same or similar facts. Departmental knowledge of those facts prevents their later characterisation as suppression. The subsequent notice must therefore be restricted to the normal limitation period, making invocation of the extended period unsustainable.</description>
      <category>Case-Laws</category>
      <law>Service Tax</law>
      <pubDate>Thu, 01 Oct 2026 00:00:00 +0530</pubDate>
      <guid isPermaLink="true">https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=800446</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>