Extended Period of Limitation Cannot Be Invoked as Assessee Had Bona Fide Belief That Service Tax Was Not Payable on Services

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

Extended Limitation Period
Case Details: Maheshwari Builders V. Commissioner of CE & CGST, Lucknow (2025) 29 CENTAX 72 (TRI.-ALL)

Judiciary and Counsel Details

  • S/Shri P.K. Choudhary, Member (J) & Anil G. Shakkarwar, Member (T)
  • Shri Vineet Kumar Singh, Adv., for the Appellant.
  • Shri Santosh Kumar, Authorized Representative, for the Respondent.

Facts of the Case

The assessee received amounts for services that were either covered by the negative list or eligible for exemption. Based on this, the assessee believed that service tax was not payable. However, the department alleged suppression of facts as the differential turnover was not declared in ST-3 returns. The issue before the Allahabad Tribunal was whether the extended period of limitation could be invoked by the department as the assessee had a bona fide belief that service tax was not payable on services covered by the negative list or eligible for exemption.

CESTAT Held

The Tribunal noted that the services were either covered by the negative list or exempt under Notification No. 25/2012-ST, as amended. Despite the adjudicating authority acknowledging this, the demands were confirmed without proper evaluation. The Tribunal held that relying solely on Form 26AS without assessing exemptions or verifying service nature was insufficient. It was held that the assessee’s belief was genuine and supported by precedent. Therefore, the extended limitation period was not applicable, and the demand was unsustainable. The appeal was allowed, and the impugned order was set aside.

List of Cases Cited

List of Notifications Cited

Leave Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Stories
No Interference Needed as Assessee Ignored SCN & Hearings | HC

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

May 5, 2025

HC Quashes Penalty on Partner for Non-Service of SCN

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

May 2, 2025

No Service Tax on Freight and Insurance Recovered From Dealers | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 30, 2025

HC Sets Aside Ex-Parte Service Tax Order for Ignoring Assessee’s Contention

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

HC Condones 165-Day Delay in Filing Appeal Due to Counsel’s Lapse

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 29, 2025

Punjab and Haryana HC Upholds Disallowance of Cenvat Credit Depreciation

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 28, 2025

HC Rules Limitation u/s 11B Doesn’t Apply to Service Tax Refunds Paid by Mistake

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 28, 2025

Proceedings for Recovery of Interest Cannot Survive Once Tax Demand is Invalidated and a Refund is Ordered | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 16, 2025

Valuation Can’t Be Done at 110% of Cost if Goods Used for Rendering Services, Not for Resale or Manufacture | CESTAT

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 10, 2025

Order Directing Recovery of Duty to Be Set Aside as Dept. Relied on Panchanama but Its Contents Were Not Tested by Cross-Examination | HC

Excise & Service Tax • News • Case Chronicles

April 9, 2025