9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (2) TMI 853 - HC - Service TaxPrinciples of Natural Justice - respondent herein has merely inform the petitioner that on verification of the records it was found that the petitioner was not registered for paying service tax - Construction of Residential Complex Service - HELD THAT - There is no order that has been passed by the 3rd respondent for it to be quashed or set aside. It further appears the 3rd respondent sent several reminders to the petitioner on 26.2.2013, 04.03.2013 and thereafter issued summons to the petitioner. Meanwhile, the petitioner has furnished some of the details and has applied for a centralised registration on 13.1.2013 under the category for Construction of Residential Complex Service . Since the petitioner is admittedly liable to tax and has obtained centralised registration, it is for the department to investigate and issue appropriate notice and in case there was non-payment of tax by the petitioner. Petition dismissed.
Issues:
Challenge to communication directing petitioner to furnish service tax details. Analysis: The petitioner filed a writ petition seeking to quash a communication from the 3rd respondent dated 30.1.2013, which requested the petitioner to provide service tax payment details and registration number. The communication did not contain any order to be set aside. The 3rd respondent had sent reminders and issued summons to the petitioner. The petitioner had provided some details and applied for centralised registration under a specific service category. As the petitioner was liable for tax and had obtained centralised registration, any investigation or notice for non-payment of tax was the responsibility of the department. The court found that since the petitioner was liable for tax and had obtained centralised registration, the writ petition challenging the communication lacked merit. The court dismissed the writ petition, stating that the petitioner's obligation to furnish details to the 3rd respondent was justified. No costs were awarded, and the connected miscellaneous petition was closed.
|
