2016 (5) TMI 1367 - HC - Service Tax

Extended period of limitation - the decision in the case of M/s Diamond Power Infrastructure Ltd. And Shri Amit Bhatnagar Versus Commissioner Central Excise & Service Tax Vadodara-II 2015 (10) TMI 2344 - CESTAT AHMEDABAD contested where it was held that The demand period is from May 2009 to May 2010 whereas the SCN was issued on 11.08.2011 which is clearly beyond the normal limitation period of 1 year and is required to be set aside - Held that - before the Larger Bench pronounced its judgment in the year 2010 different Benches of the Tribunal had given conflicting decisions. That being the position there is no error in the view of the Tribunal not permitting the Department to invoke larger period of limitation - appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue.

Summary

The Gujarat High Court dismissed the Revenue's appeal against the judgment of CESTAT. The issue was regarding the extended period of limitation for invoking duty liability on Cenvat credit. The Tribunal did not allow the extended period due to uncertainty and conflicting decisions by different Benches. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the larger period of limitation should be reserved for cases involving fraud, collusion, or misstatement.