Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Service Tax Service Tax + HC Service Tax - 2018 (9) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2018 (9) TMI 582 - HC - Service Tax


Issues:
1. Certiorarified Mandamus sought for quashing orders related to tax liability.
2. Contrary order to circular issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs.
3. Non-registration and non-payment of service taxes challenged.
4. Compliance with Circular No.123/5/2010 dated 24.05.2010.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Certiorarified Mandamus sought for quashing orders related to tax liability
The petitioners in three Writ Petitions sought Certiorarified Mandamus to quash orders related to tax liability. The first petitioner filed to quash an order dated 30.03.2012, the second petitioner filed to quash an order dated 16.03.2011, and the third petitioner filed to quash proceedings dated 18.10.2011. The petitioners requested the Government of India Enterprise to remit applicable taxes if the tax liability is confirmed.

Issue 2: Contrary order to circular issued by Central Board of Excise and Customs
The second petitioner challenged an order dated 16.03.2011, stating it was contrary to Circular No.123/5/2010 dated 24.05.2010 issued by the Central Board of Excise and Customs. The petitioner sought a Certiorari to quash the order based on this contention.

Issue 3: Non-registration and non-payment of service taxes challenged
The petitioners were issued notices to show cause regarding non-registration and non-payment of service taxes. The petitioners argued that similar issues were previously considered by the Court in other cases and disposed of by directing the petitioners to submit objections/reply to the show cause notices.

Issue 4: Compliance with Circular No.123/5/2010 dated 24.05.2010
The Court referred to a previous judgment where it directed petitioners to submit objections/reply within two weeks of receiving the order. The Court instructed the first respondent to consider these objections and pass final orders within eight weeks. The Court emphasized compliance with Circular No.123/5/2010 dated 24.05.2010 in the proceedings.

In conclusion, the Court disposed of all the writ petitions with directions for the respondents to consider objections/replies from the petitioners and pass final orders within a specified timeframe, ensuring compliance with Circular No.123/5/2010 dated 24.05.2010.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates