TMI Blog2023 (4) TMI 873X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... HON'BLE MS. JUSTICE RITU BAHRI AND HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE KULDEEP TIWARI Present: For the petitioner : Mr. Sandeep Goyal, Advocate. For the respondents : Mr. Anshuman Chopra, Advocate, Ritu Bahri, J. Petitoner-M/s Bhupinder Singh Associates is seeking a writ in the nature of certiorari quashing the order dated 15.12.2020 (Annexure P-9) passed by respondent No. 1 on the ground that it has been passed after the expiry of reasonable period of five years from the date of show cause notices dated 23.10.2013 and 16.10.2015 (Annexures P-3 and P-6) as per the judgment passed by this Court in GPI Textiles Ltd. vs. Union of India and another, CWP No. 10530 of 2017 (decided on 02.08.2018) (Annexure P-12). The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r was issued show cause notice dated 23.10.2013 (Annexure P-3) for the period 2008-09 to 2011-12, stating that the it had provided services of Rs. 13,47,95,161/- and was liable to pay service tax of Rs. 1,66,60,682/-, including education cess and secondary and higher education cess. The service tax had been imposed stating that the petitioner had contravened the provisions of Sections 66, 67, 68, 69 and 70 of the Act read with Rules 4, 4A, 5, 6 and 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. The service tax amounting to Rs. 1,66,60,682/- along with interest under Section 75 and penalty under Sections 76, 77 and 78 of the Act was also proposed to be imposed. The petitioner submitted its reply dated 21.11.2013 (Annexure P-4) giving details of the break ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to a residential house, which was for personal use of the recipient and the same was out of the purview of service tax. After a gap of more than five years, the petitioner was served with a notice of personal hearing on 17.06.2020, to which, it (petitioner) filed a reply dated 08.08.2020. Subsequently, the petitioner filed another reply dated 10.09.2020 (Annexure P-8) requesting for vacation of the notice. Finally, order dated 15.12.2020 (Annexure P-9) (received on 24.12.2020) was passed by the Commissioner of Goods and Service Tax Commissionerate, Jalandhar, confirming the following demands:- Sr. No. Show Cause Notice dated Tax Interest Pen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 11), whereby it has been held that as per Section 73 (4B) of the Finance Act, the statutory authority has to decide the show cause notice within the time prescribed and if, it is not done so in time, the show cause notice is liable to be set aside on the issue of limitation alone. He has referred to another judgment passed by the Gujarat High Court in Siddhi Vinayak Sintex Pvt. Ltd. vs. Union of India, 2017 (352) ELT 455, whereby same view has been taken that delay in conclusion of proceedings pursuant to show cause notices after a long gap without proper explanation is unlawful and arbitrary. Further, reference has been made to the judgment passed by this Court in Bathinda District Cooperative Milk Producers Union Ltd. vs. State o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
