TMI Blog2019 (12) TMI 239X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f relevance. There is no disputation or disagreement before this Court that this circular is operating. This Court is of the considered view that this is a fit case to remit the matter back to the respondent for redoing after affording an opportunity of personal hearing afresh to the writ petitioner the order assessing service tax after - petition disposed off by way of remand. - W.P.No.19120 of 2019 and W.M.P.No.18482 of 2019 - - - Dated:- 13-8-2019 - MR. M. SUNDAR, J. For Petitioner : Mr. T. R. Ramesh For Respondent : Mr. M. Santhanaraman Senior Standing Counsel for Central Excise ORDER Mr. T.R. Ramesh, learned counsel on record for writ petitioner and Mr. M.Santhanara ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... GST regime came into force on 01.07.2017, the instant matter was assigned to the respondent viz., Commissioner of GST and Central Excise, Chennai -Outer by the principal Chief Commissioner of GST and Central Excise. 5. Paragraphs 3.1 and 4.2 of the impugned order read as follows: '3.1. Personal hearing was held on 15.11.2016. Shri K.Girithar, Manager-Ops and Ms.A.Gomathi, Manager-Admin of the assessee, appeared for the personal hearing and submitted a written reply dated 15.11.2016. 4.2. Personal hearing pertaining to this case was conducted and concluded by me in my capacity as Commissioner of Service Tax II, Chennai. However, order-in-original could not be passed by me in that capacity on account ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... dated 07.08.2019 captures the lis in a nutshell. Pursuant to aforesaid proceedings, instant writ petition, is listed today. 5. As already alluded to supra, with consent of learned counsel on both sides, main writ petition is taken up and is being disposed of. 6. Pursuant to the aforesaid proceedings, learned Revenue Counsel, on instructions, submits that the factual matrix as captured in the impugned order is not under disputation. 7. Be that as it may, learned counsel for writ petitioner has filed a typed set of papers wherein notifications made vide gazette publications being publications made by the Government of India dated 11.04.1992 and 08.05.1993 have been placed before this Court as part of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . However, this does not impede or fetter the rights of the respondent, if the respondent choses to give a personal hearing in his discretion, considering the nature and circumstances surrounding the matter. In the instant matter, the respondent has chosen to give a personal hearing in the factual setting before him. Therefore it is made clear that this order cannot be cited as a precedent to say that personal hearing is imperative in all matters of this nature. 10. With the aforesaid clarificatory observation, this Court now proceeds to deal with the impugned order. 11. As it would be evident from the proceedings dated 07.08.2019, personal hearing was held on 15.06.2016 and the impugned order has been passed on 07 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the respondent for redoing after affording an opportunity of personal hearing afresh to the writ petitioner the order assessing service tax after. 13. Owing to all that have been set out, the following order is passed: (a) Impugned order being order dated 26.07.2018 bearing reference in Original No.24/2018 (R), made by the sole respondent is set aside. It is made clear that the impugned order is set aside solely on the ground of delay between the dates of personal hearing and the date of the order. In other words, no opinion or view is expressed on the merits of the matter. (b) Respondent shall offer personal hearing to the writ petitioner after giving adequate advance notice to the writ petitioner. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
