AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (11) TMI 772
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ervices, Information Technology Software Services, Online Information and Data Services, all being taxable to Service Tax under various sub-sections of Section 65(105). On the basis of audit conducted, several infractions were found on the part of the appellant leading to issuance of show cause notice dated 24.10.2013 raising demand of Rs.5.13 Crore. On adjudication, the demand of Rs.1,55,93,138/- was confirmed and the remaining demand was dropped by the impugned order. Hence, the present appeal has been filed by the appellant before this Tribunal. 2. Heard Shri B.L. Narasimhan and Shri Kunal Aggarwal, Advocates for the appellant and Ms. Jaya Kumari, Authorised Representative for the Department. 3. Shri B.L. Narasimhan, learned Counse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mal limitation period prescribed under the provisions of Section 73 being one year, the entire period under demand falls under the extended period and in fact, the demand for the period 2007-08 is even beyond the extended period of five years. For invoking the extended period under the proviso to Section 73(1), it is essential on the part of the Revenue to plead explicitly and specifically as to under which category the case of the appellant falls. The line of decisions cited clearly lays down that the burden is on the Revenue to raise allegations in the show cause notice pointing to the guilt of the appellant. The relevant paragraph in the show cause notice reads as follows: "Whereas the assessee was under statutory obligation of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... simple ground, we are of the view that invocation of the extended period is not justified and, therefore, the demand is unsustainable. In support of our decision, we would like to refer to the decision in Collector of Central Excise Vs. HMM Limited- 1995 (76) ELT 497 (SC), where the Apex Court has categorically stated that it must be alleged in the show cause notice that the duty of excise has not been levied or paid by reason of fraud, collusion, or wilful misstatement or suppression of fact on the part of the assessee or by reason of contravention of any of the provisions of the Act or of the rules made thereunder with intent to evade payment of duties by such person or his agent and since there is no such averment to be found in the sho....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eturns are filed. For this purpose, the officer may require the assessee to produce accounts, documents and other evidence he may deem necessary. Thus, in the scheme of the Finance Act, 1994, the officer has been given wide powers to call for information and has been entrusted the responsibility of making the correct assessment as per his best judgment. If the officer fails to scrutinize the returns and make the best judgment assessment and some tax escapes assessment which is discovered after the normal period of limitation is over, the responsibility for such loss of Revenue rests squarely on the shoulders of the officer. It is incorrect to say that had the audit not been conducted, the allegedly ineligible CENVAT credit would not have co....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....larified the position with reference to the provisions of Section 72 in the following terms: "13. As far as the limitation is concerned, the demand invoking extended period of limitation can be raised as per section 73 only if there is (a) fraud; or (b) collusion; or (c) wilful misstatement; or (d) suppression of facts; or (e) violation of Act, with an intent to evade payment of service tax. The show cause notice invoked extended period of limitation 'As self-assessment provisions apply to Service tax, incorrect assessment and payment of service tax by the assessee amount to deliberate misdeclaration and suppression of facts with the intent to evade..'. This proposition of the Commissioner in the show cause notice is alien ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ioner imagined that wrong self-assessment by an assessee would amount to deliberate mis-declaration and suppression of facts with intent to evade. As per the Finance Act, 1994, if the assessee wrongly self-assesses tax in its returns and none of the five elements required to invoke extended period of limitation is present and if the demand gets time-barred, the responsibility for it rest squarely on the officer who had the jurisdiction and the mandate to the Best Judgment assessment under section 72 but has not done so and NOT on the assessee. Therefore, the invocation of the extended period of limitation cannot be sustained". 9. The present case is not where the appellant is not registered under the Act nor is it that they have not file....