TMI Blog2016 (11) TMI 647X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... only when there is suppression of facts. In the present case even in the Revenue’s appeal there is no charge of suppression of facts and infact respondent informed the department about their service activity of merger and acquisition therefore extended period was not invokable, the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly dropped the demand on limitation. As regard the merit of the case, we find that services undisputedly are of financing, merger and acquisition, these services were specifically brought in the definition of banking and financial services w.e.f. 16/7/2001 therefore during the period 1999-2000 these services were not taxable in other heads. Appeal dismissed - decided against Revenue. - ST/321/11, ST/CO/83/11 - A/90716-90 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... isted before 10-9-2000 without suppression of fact also demand could have been issued for longer period therefore the Commissioner(Appeals) has wrongly dropped the demand on time bar. 3. On the other hand, Shri. Vishal Agarwal, Ld. Counsel with Shri. Roshil Nichani, Ld. Advocate appearing on behalf of the Respondent submits that though the Ld. Commissioner (Appeals) dropped the demand on time bar but even on merit the demand of service was not sustainable on the services of merger and acquisition as the same was became taxable only w.e.f. 16/7/2001 when the said entry incorporated in the services of banking and financial service. In this regard, he placed reliance in case of M/s. Kotak Mahindra Capital Co Ltd Vs. Commissi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the present case. If this is so then the appeal of the Revenue which solely on the basis of this ground does not survive. As per amended provision of Section 73, extended period can be invoked only when there is suppression of facts. In the present case even in the Revenue s appeal there is no charge of suppression of facts and infact respondent informed the department about their service activity of merger and acquisition therefore extended period was not invokable, the Ld. Commissioner(Appeals) has rightly dropped the demand on limitation. As regard the merit of the case, we find that services undisputedly are of financing, merger and acquisition, these services were specifically brought in the definition of banking and fi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
