TMI Blog2009 (5) TMI 519X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Petitioner. S/Shri N.C. Roychowdhury, Sr. Advocate with R. Bharadwaj, Advocate, for the Respondent. [Order]. - The Court : The petitioner no.1, a private limited company and the petitioner no.2, one of its directors and shareholders, have challenged the show cause notice dated 9th October, 2007 issued by the Commissioner of Service Tax, Kolkata, the respondent no.2 on various grounds. 2. Incidentally, in this writ petition, Central Warehousing Corporation, CTA Movers Pvt. Ltd. and J.M. Boxy Co. Pvt. Ltd., are the other respondents being respondent nos. 4, 5 and 6 respectively. The respondent no.5, as it appears from the writ petition, is a separate company promoted by the directors of the petitioner no.1 and is having the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , 2008 the proceeding initiated by the show cause notice may continue but no final order shall be communicated to the writ petitioner rising out of the adjudication proceeding initiated by the show cause notice. It is to be noted that the interim order passed has been extended from time to time and is continuing till this date. 5. Be it noted that the Service Tax Authorities, the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and Central Warehousing Corporation, a Government of India undertaking, the respondent no.4 have filed their respective affidavits and are on record. 6. Learned advocate for the petitioner, reiterating the statements made in the writ petition, has submitted that the petitioner has given an effective reply to the queries pursuant to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... l dispose of the same by passing a reasoned order afresh to be communicated to the parties after giving an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner within six weeks from the date of submission of written reply by the petitioner. At the time of hearing, the petitioner shall be at liberty to take all the points which have been agitated in the writ petition and can rely on affidavit-in-opposition affirmed on 21.1.2008 by Kalu Ram on behalf of the Central Warehousing Corporation, the respondent no.4 and the affidavit-in-opposition affirmed by Nanda Kumar Bhattacharjee on 2nd April, 2008 on behalf of the respondent nos. 1, 2 and 3 and the respondent no.2 in his reasoned order shall deal with the same. 11. It is needless to mention that the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
