Service Tax
TRT-2025-
Cestat Ahmedabad
Date:-16-01-24
In:-
Issue Favourable to Tax Payer ?:-
Order Date – 16 January 2024
Parties: M/S. Expositions & Conventions Vs C.C.E.-Ahmedabad-II
Facts –
- The Appellant, M/S. Expositions & Conventions, is a proprietorship concern engaged in conducting conferences and exhibitions for various entities.
- During the search operation it was found that the appellant had filed ST-3 returns for the period October 2014 to June 2017 but they had short declared their taxable value, as compared to their actual taxable value which had resultant in short payment of Service tax.
- Accordingly, a detailed show cause notice dated 26th June 2020 was issued invoking extended period of limitation.
Issue –
- Whether the extended period of limitation is inviolable, in the facts and circumstances of the case?
Order –
- The Tribunal observed that it is abundantly clear that mens rea/the intent to evade the tax liability is the core for invoking the extended period over the normal period. Appellants apparently have mentioned themselves to be under the bona fide belief of still not being liable under service tax. Based on the said belief only they have not disclosed the said disputed taxable value in ST-3 returns filed before the department.
- Their such bona fide belief stands corroborated from the fact that all the transactions related to the said disputed taxable value has been disclosed by the appellant in their books of account, profit & loss account and in Balance Sheet. If the appellant have intention to evade service tax they would not have disclosed the same.
- Further the documents relied on by the authority for issuing Show Cause Notice are the statutory documents which have to be prepared and filed before the respective authorities within the time-frame prescribed under the respective statutes like the Income Tax Act or the Companies Act, or Service tax law as the case may be. Clearly, the disputed service income has been picked up from these very statutory documents and therefore, there cannot be any scope to allege suppression of the fact.
- Accordingly, held that the extended period of limitation is not inviolable, in the facts and circumstances of the case.
Download Case Law
