9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (12) TMI 969 - SC - Service TaxValidity of High Court order - the SCN dated 4th October, 2016 issued to the respondent proposing levy of service tax has been set aside with liberty to the appellants to issue a fresh SCN - Held that - the High Court ought not to have set aside the SCN dated 4th October, 2016 in its entirety and directed issuance of fresh SCN. The High Court ought to have kept in mind the question of limitation and on that basis ordered for adjudication of the issues/demands raised in the show cause notice dated 4th October, 2016 which survive and required an adjudication on merits. The SCN dated 4th October, 2016 in so far as the surviving issues/demands are concerned shall be adjudicated subject to such contentions as may be advanced on behalf of the respondent in its reply/additional reply that may be filed in the matter. Appeal allowed.
Issues:
Challenge to High Court order setting aside show cause notice and directing issuance of fresh notice, Validity of show cause notice dated 4th October, 2016, Bar on limitation for issuing fresh notice, Direction for adjudication of surviving demands in the original notice. Analysis: The Supreme Court addressed the challenge in the present appeal, which was against an order of the High Court setting aside a show cause notice dated 4th October, 2016, proposing the levy of service tax. The High Court found that a part of the notice was not maintainable due to an amendment to Section 105 of the Finance Act, 1994. However, the High Court also acknowledged the validity of the notice regarding other demands. The appellants contended that issuing a fresh notice for surviving demands would be time-barred, and the High Court should have directed adjudication of the surviving demands in the original notice. The Supreme Court, after considering arguments from both parties, held that the High Court erred in setting aside the entire notice and directing a fresh one without considering the limitation issue. The Court directed that the surviving issues and demands in the original notice should be adjudicated, taking into account any contentions raised by the respondent in their reply. Consequently, with this modification, the appeal was disposed of by the Supreme Court.
|
