Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
- ⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
- 🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision
Try it now in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New Feature Launched ✕
Just a moment...
Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.
Try it now in Case Laws →
By creating an account you can:
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All TMI Notes
of of All TMI Notes
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Steps for Prosecuting Service Tax Evasion: Evidence, Sanction, and Swift Action Required per Guidelines.</h1> The procedure for prosecuting evasion of service tax or central excise involves several steps. Initially, the prosecution proposal must be examined and forwarded to the relevant authority, such as the Chief Commissioner or Director General, after careful review by the Commissioner or Additional Director General. Prosecution should not be initiated in cases of technical nature or based solely on legal interpretation differences. Adequate evidence demonstrating guilty knowledge or fraudulent intent is necessary. Decisions on prosecution should be made promptly post-adjudication, considering factors like the offense's gravity and evidence quality. Once sanctioned, the complaint should be filed swiftly, with all necessary documents prepared and managed efficiently to avoid delays in court proceedings.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 