2008 (8) TMI 185 - AT - Service Tax

Ex parte order - violation of natural justice - Although two adjournments had been granted to appellants, yet the appellants had made a plea for further adjourning the case according to appellant, adjournment letter was not placed before the Commissioner (A) resulting in passing of the order ex parte - no reason given in the impugned order by Commissioner while confirming OIO - matter is remanded to Commissioner (A) to decide the issue after granting an opportunity of hearing to the appellants

Summary

Issues: Stay application, appeal disposal, violation of natural justice, non-levy of Service Tax, remand to Commissioner (A).

In this case, the appellant submitted that the impugned Order-in-Appeal was ex parte and violated natural justice principles. Despite receiving two adjournments, the appellant requested further adjournment due to reasons outlined in their letter, which was not presented before the Commissioner (A), leading to the ex parte order. The appellant, providing franchise service and receiving services from a Foreign Service provider, contested Service tax demands, arguing that the impugned order lacked reasoning and failed to address their pleas regarding non-levy of Service Tax. The appellant sought a remand to explain their case to the Commissioner (A) for a fair decision.

Upon hearing the JCDR defending the order, the Tribunal concluded that the appellants should have been given another opportunity to contest the case, considering their pleas on non-levy of Service Tax. The impugned order merely upheld the Order-in-Original without providing any rationale. Therefore, the Tribunal allowed the stay application, remanded the appeal to the Commissioner (A) for a decision after granting the appellants a hearing opportunity. The appellants were instructed to cooperate, and the matter was to be resolved within four months from the date of the order, resulting in the appeal being allowed through remand to the Commissioner (A).