2021 (2) TMI 1225 - HC - Service Tax

Levy of penalty - appropriation of amount paid by the petitioner during the course of investigation towards the tax liability - benefit of waiver from payment of Parenti under section 73 (3) of the Finance Act, 1994 - HELD THAT - Though no counter has been filed, this writ petition is liable to be dismissed. The petitioner has been issued with the impugned show cause notice only. It is for the petitioner to file reply to the same and participate in the adjudication process under the Finance Act, 1994. No comments made on the merits of the case - petition disposed off.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge to Show Cause Notice for service tax demand and penalty imposition.

Analysis:
The petitioner challenged Show Cause Notice No.27/2014 proposing a service tax demand of ?18,57,154 and penalty imposition. The petitioner claimed a bona fide belief of not being liable for service tax on property renting. The petitioner alleged denial of waiver from payment under section 73(3) of the Finance Act, 1994 due to the issuance of the impugned notice.

The Court noted the absence of a counter and held that the writ petition is subject to dismissal as the petitioner had only received the show cause notice. The petitioner was directed to respond to the notice and engage in the adjudication process under the Finance Act, 1994. The Court refrained from making any observations on the case's merits, emphasizing the petitioner's opportunity to present arguments during the adjudication process.

The petitioner was instructed to submit a reply to the show cause notice within 30 days and the 1st respondent was mandated to issue an appropriate order within three months from the receipt of the Court's order. The Court ensured the petitioner's right to be heard either in person, through a representative physically, or via video conference before the final order is passed. The writ petition was disposed of with these directions, with no costs imposed, and the miscellaneous petition was closed on 10.02.2021.