Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2018 (4) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (4) TMI 116 - HC - Service TaxAppointment of adjudicating authorities - case of petitioner is that the order dated 16.09.2015 appointing respondent No.4 as an adjudicating authority is bad, as by notification dated 19.04.2007, only Commissioners of Central Excise were given the powers of Central Excise Officers. As a result order dated 08.12.2016 is without jurisdiction, having been passed by the Deputy Commissioner. Held that: - Clause 11.2 (ii) of the Master Circular (CBEC Circular dated 29.09.2016) does not mean that show cause notices issued to different noticees on the same issue shall be adjudicated by one authority. It would relate only to cases where on a similar issue different show cause notices have been issued to the same noticee - Clause 11.5 clarifies the position. If different show cause notices have been issued on the same issue to the same noticee answerable to different adjudicating authorities, then all the show cause notices would be decided by the adjudicating authority in a case involving the highest amount of duty. From a reading of the clauses 11.2 and 11.5 of the Master Circular, the position emerges that only if similar show cause notices are issued to the same noticee by different adjudicating authorities, all such notices would be adjudicated by one adjudicating authority, i.e. the officer competent to decide the case involving the highest amount of duty. The challenge to the order dated 16.09.2015 also fails. Petition dismissed.
|