Mere omission to fulfill tax liability not amounts to fraud or misrepresentation

Commissioner of Central Tax GST Vs Team HR Services Ltd. (Delhi High Court)

The mere advertence to the possibility of service tax – without any material or evidence – or even a finding that such service tax had been collected by the assessee during the past, cannot per se amount to a conclusion that it had practiced fraud or misrepresentation. It has been repeatedly emphasized by the Supreme Court in Uniworth Textiles Ltd. v. Commissioner of Central Excise, 2012 (9) SCC 753, Pushpam

Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.