TMI Blog2015 (12) TMI 417X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this order. As regards, challenge to the show cause notice, the petitioner shall file a detailed and comprehensive representation. In case any such representation is filed by the petitioner, the same shall be decided by the competent authority expeditiously in accordance with law by passing a speaking order and after affording an opportunity of hearing to the petitioner. - Petition disposed of. - CWP No. 25146 of 2015 - - - Dated:- 2-12-2015 - Mr. Ajay kumar mittal And Mr. Ramendra Jain, JJ For the Petitioner : Mr. R. Santhanam, Advocate, Mr. Ajay Jain, Advocate and Mr. Sachin Gupta, Advocate ORDER AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. In this petition file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3) containing certain questions and answers by way of clarification of doubts with regard to issues arising for implementation of VCES. A further circular dated 8.8.2013 (Annexure P-4) was issued by the CBEC to give further clarifications to ensure that mere calling for information of a roving nature would not attract Section 106(2)(a) of the Act even though the authority of Section 14 of the Excise Act, 1944 have been quoted therein. Thereafter, respondent No.3 issued a further circular dated 25.11.2013 (Annexure P-5) providing further clarifications on issues and doubts raised and the designated authority as well as the Commissioners have been directed to ensure the time limit of 30 days was followed scrupulously without any deviation in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the petitioner for details of booking amount charged/construction linked payment from buyers w.e.f. 1.7.2010. The Superintendent issued a letter dated 5.9.2013 to respondent No.1 to the effect that the petitioner was duly registered for service tax but has not filed returns and paid service tax. The said letter was received along with the letter dated 8.10.2013 issued by respondent No.1. The copies of letters dated 8.10.2013 and 5.9.2013 are appended as Annexure P-10 (Colly.) with the petition. Thereafter, respondent No.1 issued a show cause notice dated 18.9.2013 (Annexure P-11) proposing to reject the declaration of the petitioner filed on 17.7.2013. However, vide order dated 27.11.2013 (Annexure P-12), respondent No.1 rejected the dec ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nd 2011-12 have already been filed before the respondents. The central excise and service tax audit of the petitioner was carried out by the audit officers as is evident from the letter dated 14.6.2013 (Annexure P-21). The records and documents of the petitioner relating to service tax had been called for and after verifying the same, the audit was completed and a certificate dated 26.3.2014 (Annexure P-22) for completion of audit was issued. Thereafter, respondent No.2 issued summons dated 31.7.2015, 10.8.2015 and 12.10.2015 (Annexures P-23 to P-25, respectively) asking the petitioner to furnish all the records and documents which had already been furnished. Respondent No.3 issued a show cause notice dated 21.10.2015 (Annexure P-26) for re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
