Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 22 (0.25 seconds)
Levis Strauss India Pvt Ltd vs Bangalore Service Tax-Ii on 22 October, 2024 cites

M/S. Anand Nishikawa Co.Ltd vs Commissioner Of Central Excise,Meerut on 23 September, 2005

18. We find that as regards invoking the extended period of limitation, though it is alleged that the Appellant had suppressed the facts regarding value of taxable service received with intent to evade payment of service tax, there is no substantial finding given by Adjudication Authority for invoking the extended period of limitation. As per the law laid down by Hon'ble Apex Court in the matter of M/s Anand Nishkawa Co Ltd Vs. CC Meerut (2005) TIOL-118-SC-CX, if correct information is not disclosed deliberately to evade payment of duty and when facts are known to both the parties, omission by one to do so be would not render suppression of facts. Mere failure to declare will not amounts to wilful suppression. There must be some positive act Page 16 of 21 Service Tax Appeal No.21353/2017 from the side of assessee to find wilful suppression as per Section 11A of the Central Excise Act, 1994. Thus, the impugned order confirming demand beyond the normal period of limitation is unsustainable.
Supreme Court of India Cites 12 - Cited by 70 - T Chatterjee - Full Document
1   2 3 Next