“EXTENDED PERIOD OF LIMITATION”
The deadlines for issuing Notice U/s 73 for FY 2017-18 and 2018-19 were 30-Sep-2023, and 31-Jan-2024.
Now, the department cannot issue notice U/s 73 for these years but can use Sec. 74 against you.
Research compilation to challenge Sec. 74.
1. Supreme Court
1.1 Krishnaraj Shipping Co. Ltd.
ARR: Extended period of limitation was not invocable for demanding service tax which involved an interpretational dispute.
2. CESTAT Chandigarh
2.1 Antares Services Pvt. Ltd.
Without putting forth evidence of suppression, mis-statement, fraud, collusion etc., invocation of extended period of limitation not proper.
3. CESTAT Ahmedabad
3.1 Dinesh Chandra R Agarwal Infracon Pvt. Ltd.
If the order under section 73(1) of Finance Act, 1994 was made without proof of intentional revenue suppression or misdeclaration by the appellant, it should be overturned.
3.2 Arya Logistics
In absence of suppression of fact, show cause notice issued after prescribed limit of one year not sustainable.
4. CESTAT Delhi
4.1 State Bank of Patiala
Neither providing loan on interest by bank was a service nor earning of tax exempt interest was an exempt service; since bank’s activities were never suppressed, show cause notice was bad for invoking extended period of limitation.
5. CESTAT Allahabad
5.1 Interarch Building Products Pvt. Ltd.
Where assessee had regularly filed ST-3 returns, audit of their records undertaken regularly, and even after examination of their records, department had not objected to category of service rendered by them, as department was aware of facts from audit, extended limitation period could not be invoked on allegation that assessee had wrongly classified their service with intent to evade service tax and avail inadmissible Cenvat credit.
6. Delhi High Court
6.1 ITD-ITD CEM JV
Where reason to believe had not been recorded in writing, assessment order passed in extended period is time barred.
6.2 H.M. Industries
Since there was not any assertion in assessment order that there was concealment, omission or failure on part of assessee to disclose full particulars, extended period of limitation would not be applicable.
7. Mumbai CESTAT
7.1 Bajaj Health & Nutrition Pvt. Ltd.
For failure of Customs to levy and collect Anti-dumping duty, appellant cannot be charged for misdeclaration and intent of evasion. Extended period of limitation U/s 28 not invokable.
Thanks & Regards
Abhishek Raja Ram