9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (8) TMI 809 - AT - Service TaxTime Limitation - the period involved is 2011-12 and the date of SCN is 26.05.2015 - no malafide intent - Held that - Admittedly the entire facts have been taken by the audit from the assessee s record, thus substantiating their plea that everything was being reflected in the books of accounts - It is well-settled that in such a scenario no mala fide can be attributed to the appellant so as to justifiably invoke the longer period of limitation - appeal allowed - decided in favor of appellant.
Issues: Time-barred demand of Service Tax, Export of management services, Notification No.6/2010, Invocation of longer period of limitation
In this case, the appellant challenged the demand of Service Tax amounting to ?68,890 along with interest and penalty, which was confirmed by the lower authorities. The period involved was 2011-12, and the date of the show cause notice was 26.05.2015. The appellant had exported management services to foreign customers who utilized the services in India. The appellant contended that the payment for the services was received in foreign exchange, satisfying the conditions of Notification No.6/2010. The appellant argued that the demand was time-barred as the facts and transactions were duly reflected in their business records, indicating no mala fide intent to evade tax. Regarding the limitation issue, the lower authorities invoked the longer period on the basis that the appellant did not disclose the relevant facts to the Revenue. However, the tribunal found no merit in this contention. It was noted that all facts had been audited from the appellant's records, demonstrating that the transactions were properly reflected in the books of accounts. As there was no evidence of mala fide intent on the part of the appellant, the tribunal set aside the impugned order and allowed the appeal with consequential relief. The judgment emphasized that when all facts are transparently recorded in business records, the invocation of a longer limitation period cannot be justified, especially in the absence of any fraudulent behavior.
|
