Appeal allowed; service-tax demands quashed for lack of proof, misvaluation, no works-contract evidence; abatement and penalties set aside

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....The CESTAT allowed the appeal and set aside the impugned order in toto, holding that the Department failed to discharge the onus of proof: mere discrepancies between ST-3 returns and income tax/Form 26AS could not sustain a service-tax demand. Demands under "accommodation service" and "works contract service" (totaling the impugned amounts) were held unsustainable for want of proper fact-finding, incorrect valuation (sale of drugs mischaracterised as accommodation receipts), and absence of evidence of works-contract activity. The Tribunal also upheld entitlement to abatement and found the extended limitation unjustified; consequential interest, penalty and late fee demands were therefore set aside. Appeal allowed.....