Admissibility of electronic records: computerised data on CD can support service tax refund claims and show no transfer of tax burden.
Data on compact disc (CD) can be admissible evidence for service tax refund claims where it constitutes computerised records recognised under the Information Technology Act and the Service Tax Rules. Such electronic records may also be used to prove that the incidence of service tax was not transferred to another party (absence of unjust enrichment), provided the data meets the statutory criteria for admissible computerised evidence and forms part of the assessee's maintained electronic records.

Limitation on refund filings: time-bar inapplicable where payments were not service tax and were excess realisations.
Limitation under Section 11B(1) applies only to refund claims of a duty of excise and interest; payments not constituting service tax or lawful excise levy are outside that bar and may be refunded. Judicial authorities (M/s Natraj and Venkat Associates; ITC Ltd.) recognise that excess realisations beyond what the statute permits are realisations outside the Act and thus not subject to the statutory limitation on excise refunds.

Limitation on service tax refunds: late claims are barred unless tax was paid under protest.
Refunds of amounts paid as service tax are governed by the statutory limitation provisions; where payments were credited to the service tax account and the claimant acknowledged applicability of the limitation rule, a refund claim filed after the limitation period is barred unless the tax was paid under protest.

Appellate authority power to increase penalties is limited; payment of tax and interest can justify mitigation of penalty.
Appellate authority does not have power to increase or impose a fresh penalty; payment of tax and interest that neutralises pecuniary advantage is relevant for mitigation, and taxpayer status and proportionality are material in assessing whether a revised penalty is unduly harsh under the statutory penalty framework.

Penalty minimums prohibited from reduction: statutory scheme prevents lowering prescribed service tax penalty through discretionary provisions.
Penalty under section 78 of the Finance Act, 1994 cannot be reduced below the statutory minimum by invoking section 80; a conjoint reading of the provisions shows no discretion to levy or reduce a penalty below the prescribed floor, and appellate bodies and tribunals cannot read such power into the statutory scheme.

Penalty under Section 76 cannot be reduced below the statutory minimum; authority's discretion is confined to the prescribed range.
Section 76 penalty under the Finance Act, 1994 confines the authority to a legislatively prescribed minimum-to-maximum range; authorities lack power to reduce the penalty below the statutory minimum per day of default, and courts have rejected construing any additional discretion into the provision as that would amount to rewriting the statute.

Service tax deposit obligations do not arise where tax was not invoiced or collected, limiting unjust enrichment claims.
Where no invoice was raised and no amount was specifically collected as service tax from recipients, the statutory duty to deposit such tax does not arise because there is no collected tax to be held on behalf of the Government, and absence of pass through means the legal condition for invoking unjust enrichment is not satisfied.

Deposit of collected service tax must be remitted even if small provider exempt; penalties apply for non-deposit.
Section 73A requires that service tax collected from customers be deposited with the Central Government even if the collector avails the small service provider exemption; tribunals have held that collection triggers an obligatory deposit and failure to deposit and to file returns attracts penal action and enforcement for non-compliance.

Ignorance of law or illiteracy can undermine findings of willful suppression, affecting the validity of tax demand and penalties.
Administrative demands and penalties based on alleged willful suppression of taxable services require supporting record evidence and must correspond to allegations in the show cause notice; where the record does not substantiate suppression and the allegation was not made in the notice, the resultant service tax demand and penalties are not sustainable.

Extended limitation period: not available where assessee had bona fide belief or doubt about service tax liability.
Extended limitation cannot be invoked where the assessee had a bona fide belief that no service tax was payable, where bona fide doubt existed about chargeability, where the assessee voluntarily approached the department earlier, where the issue is one of legal interpretation creating genuine confusion, or where earlier favorable decisions were subsequently overruled without evidence of suppression.

Limitation for recovery of service tax prevents collection for time barred periods but notice remains partly effective.
A show cause notice that includes periods beyond the statutory limitation does not become wholly invalid; the Department cannot recover tax for time barred periods, and the assessee may raise the limitation defence during proceedings. The same rule applies to notices extending beyond a shorter statutory limitation-the excess period yields no departmental entitlement to recovery but does not vitiate valid allegations within the limitation.

Specific service allegation: tax liability cannot be confirmed unless the show-cause notice specifies the service head.
A show-cause notice must specifically identify the service head or sub-head relied upon; absent a precise allegation as to the applicable classification, tax liability cannot be confirmed, and alternative classifications suggested by the Commissioner without being pleaded in the notice render any demand unsustainable.

SCN requirement: absence of a show-cause notice prevents imposition of service tax and interest under revision.
Issuance of a show-cause notice under the demand provision is a prerequisite to fix service tax and interest; where only a penalty notice was issued under the penalty regime, the revisional authority cannot validly pass an order demanding service tax with interest because the penalty notice cannot substitute for a demand-stage show-cause notice.

Right to be heard required before finalising provisional assessment; taxpayer must be told grounds and allowed to respond.
An assessing authority must inform the taxpayer of the specific grounds for proposed enhanced liability and afford a meaningful opportunity to meet those grounds before finalising a provisional assessment, as a baseline requirement of natural justice in assessment proceedings.

Provisional assessment appeals permitted where statute and rules authorize provisional determinations, allowing aggrieved parties to prefer appeals.
Provisional assessments are authorized by the Act and Rules, and an aggrieved party retains the right to appeal against such provisional assessments; the provisional nature does not by itself preclude preferring appeals under the applicable appellate procedure.

Non-filing of memorandum for provisional assessment is a procedural omission and does not negate provisional assessment.
Non filing of the memorandum in Form ST 3A does not by itself negate the existence of a provisional assessment; the form serves to supply date wise details to enable the proper officer to make an accurate final assessment, and omission of that statement does not preclude that assessments were provisional, especially where the taxpayer later requests and the proper officer completes a final assessment.

Best judgment assessment must be reasoned, not arbitrary; it requires material support and more than mere guesswork.
A best-judgement assessment allows limited estimation but the assessing officer must make an honest, fair and reasoned estimate and cannot act wholly arbitrarily; technical rules of evidence are relaxed but the assessment must be based on more than mere suspicion or pure guesswork and should be supported by adequate material rather than unsupported conjecture.

Best judgment assessment: courts may not substitute their own estimate if the assessing authority's basis has reasonable nexus.
Assessment based on accounts is proper where books are genuine and substantially correct, with only minor adjustments; a best judgment assessment is used when accounts are unreliable and the authority estimates liability using available accounts, other information and surrounding circumstances. Courts reviewing a best judgment assessment must first confirm that rejection of accounts was justified and then assess whether the estimating basis has a reasonable nexus to the estimated turnover; if so, the authority's bona fide estimate should not be displaced.

Assessment in service tax: scope includes self assessment, reassessment, provisional and best judgement modes and interest determination.
Assessment for service tax includes self-assessment, reassessment, provisional assessment, best judgement assessment and any order where tax assessed is nil; it also includes determination of interest on assessed or reassessed tax. "Assessee" means a person liable to pay the tax and includes the person's agent.

Untrue self-declaration in tax return corroborates suppression and can trigger penalty under self-assessment procedures.
An untrue declaration in a service tax return asserting that tax has been paid corroborates suppression and attracts penalty; absence of a bona fide statement on the return or with the return renders the declaration faulty and imputes liability under the self-assessment procedure.