Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2015 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (7) TMI 1105 - HC - Service TaxDemand of service tax of the dissolved partnership firm from the erstwhile partners - tribunal set aside the demand - marking of copies of the show-cause notice to the three partners along with the firm, without raising any demand in the notice for recovery from the partners - renting the cabs - extended period of limitation - Held that:- Section 25 of the Partnership Act clearly mandates that all the partners are jointly and severally liable for all acts of the firm done while he is a partner. Further, in the case on hand, notice has been issued on the firm, which has also been marked to all the partners. It is also borne out by record that all the partners have accepted the liability and undertaken to make good the demand raised against the firm. Such being the case, correcting the technical error by the Commissioner (Appeals) by issuance of notice to the firm under section 84 of the Finance Act by marking copies of the notice to the partners would in no way be termed as insufficient notice on the partners. All the partners having been well aware of the demand on the firm and having undertaken to make good the demand before the adjudicating authority, now, cannot take a plea that they could not contest the said cause due to insufficient notice - Demand confirmed - Decided in favor of revenue. Extended period of limitation - Held that:- The plea of knowledge in respect of activities of Lakshmi Travels being attributed to the Department has no legs to stand. The Tribunal clearly was in error in comparing the activities of one Sanjeevi to the activities of the firm, Lakshmi Travels, Karaikal, which is in a totally different place altogether. Therefore, the reasoning given by the Tribunal, on the plea of limitation is fallacious and not tenable in law. - Demand confirmed - Decided in favor of revenue.
|