2016 (12) TMI 852

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....i Sanjay Jain, DR for the Respondent Per Archana Wadhwa: After hearing both the sides, duly represented by Ms. Rinky Jain, Advocate for the Applicants and Shri Sanjay Jain, DR for the Respondent, we find that the demand of service tax to the tune of Rs. 18,08,108/- stands confirmed against the appellant along with confirmation of interest and imposition of penalty on the ground that during t....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., longer period of limitation would not be available to the Revenue. As such we find that the longer period of limitation was not available to the Revenue. Ld. Advocate however, fairly agrees that part of the demand would fall within the limitation period. 5. In view of the above, we set aside the impugned order and hold that the demand beyond the limitation period would not be sustainable. Acc....