9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2023 (8) TMI 256 - HC - Service TaxExtended period of limitation - suppression of facts or not - SCN was beyond the period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 or not - HELD THAT - The question of limitation is not just a question of law but a mixed question of fact and law. Admittedly, in this case, the petitioner has not been filed the returns as is contemplated under Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994. Therefore, it is not open for the petitioner to allege that the Department is not entitled to invoke proviso to Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994, as there is a suppression of facts. Therefore, there is no case made out for interfering with the impugned Order-in-Original No.2/23(ST) dated 31.01.2023 passed by the respondent based on a Show Cause Notice dated 26.04.2021 invoking extended period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994 - Petition dismissed.
Issues involved:
The challenge to the impugned Order-in-Original based on the Show Cause Notice's timing and the invocation of extended period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. Summary: The petitioner challenged Order-in-Original No.2/23(ST) dated 31.01.2023, arguing that the Show Cause Notice issued on 26.04.2021 was beyond the period of limitation under Section 73 of the Finance Act, 1994. The petitioner contended that the extended period of limitation was invoked without jurisdiction as there was no ground for suppression of facts or other circumstances specified in the proviso to Section 73. The High Court noted that the question of limitation involves both law and fact. Since the petitioner had not filed the required returns under Rule 7 of the Service Tax Rules, 1994, they could not claim that the Department was not entitled to invoke the proviso to Section 73 due to suppression of facts. Consequently, the Court found no justification to interfere with the impugned Order-in-Original. However, the petitioner was granted liberty to file a statutory appeal with mandatory pre-deposit of tax within thirty days for the Appellate Authority's consideration. The Court directed the Appellate Authority to decide the appeal on its merits and in accordance with the law. The Writ Petition was dismissed with the mentioned liberty, and no costs were awarded, leading to the closure of connected Writ Miscellaneous Petitions.
|
