2009 (10) TMI 207

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ved by the respondent, during the period from 16-7-1997 to 16-10-1998, demanded through show-cause notice dated 13-9-2004 by an Order-in-Original No. 28/DII/2005, which was challenged in appeal and the matter was remanded back for fresh decision duly observing the principles of natural justice vide Order-in-Appeal No. 86/2006-C.E., dated 23-6-2006. The original authority vide impugned de novo order confirmed the amount of service tax, also demanded interest under section 75, imposed penalties under each sections of 76, 77 and 78 of the Finance Act, 1994. On appeal, the Commissioner (Appeals) relying upon various decisions of the Tribunal set aside the Order-in-Original and allowed the appeal. 3. Aggrieved by such an order, the Revenue has ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....se is totally misplaced inasmuch the said provisions of the Finance Act do not provide for making any fresh demand after lapse of five years from the relevant date. The present case is not a case wherein such demand was made earlier and was either pending or decided in terms of any provision of law, or case law, on the subject, in favour of the appellant. The validation provisions of sections 116 and 117 of the Finance Act, 2000 did validate the provisions of collection of service tax with effect from 16-7-1997 as also the action already taken or initiated, and to be taken within the prescribed time-limit, but did not envisage fresh demand beyond the statutory time-limits i.e., cases where the department had failed to initiate action in acc....