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 GST GST + HC GST - 2022 (3) TMI HC This

  • Login
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2022 (3) TMI 264 - HC - GST


Issues:
1. Alleged willful suppression of material facts to evade payment of service tax.
2. Petitioner's contention of having paid all necessary service tax.
3. Department's issuance of demand-cum-show-cause notice.
4. Lack of cooperation from the petitioner during the proceedings.
5. Direction for a fresh hearing and submission of relevant materials.

Analysis:

1. The petitioner, a registered contractor providing manpower supply service and a service provider to Oil India Limited, challenged a demand-cum-show-cause notice alleging willful suppression of material facts to evade service tax payment. The notice claimed a tax amount of ?1,46,41,544 under the Finance Act, 1994.

2. The petitioner's counsel contended that all necessary service tax had been paid as per the law, highlighting exemptions due to changes in regulations. The petitioner argued that they were not liable to pay service tax for a specific period under the new law.

3. The GST department, represented by its counsel, issued the notice due to the petitioner's absence and lack of cooperation during the proceedings. However, the department expressed willingness to grant a fresh hearing and allow the petitioner to present relevant evidence supporting their tax payments.

4. The court acknowledged the petitioner's claim of having paid all taxes but refrained from delving into the matter under Article 226. The court deemed it inappropriate to assess tax payments without the petitioner submitting all relevant materials, as claimed by the department.

5. In the final judgment, the court directed the Joint Commissioner of Central Goods and Service Tax to conduct a fresh hearing for the petitioner. The petitioner was instructed to appear with all relevant materials on a specified date. The Joint Commissioner was tasked with evaluating the evidence, allowing the petitioner to raise any issues, and issuing a reasoned order superseding the earlier demand-cum-show-cause notice.

6. Pending the fresh hearing and the issuance of a reasoned order, the court prohibited any coercive actions against the petitioner. The writ petition was allowed in favor of the petitioner, subject to the outlined directives for the upcoming proceedings.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates